This paper presents a review of experimental data from tests of target acquisition with electro-optical, raster scan systems. These data, as well as equipment parameters such as sensor field of view, system line number, display size, and target size on the display, can be used to estimate target acquisition performance by system operators. The paper lists the equations required to make such performance estimations, and several examples are given. The procedure can be used to compute equipment characteristics required to insure prescribed levels of target acquisition performance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BakerC. A.NicholsonR. M.Raster scan parameters and target identification. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 19th Annual Material Aerospace Electronics Conference, May, 1967.
2.
BibermanL. M.Perception of displayed information.New York-London: Plenum Press,1973.
3.
BrainardR. W.HanfordE. C.MarshallR. H.Resolution requirements for identification of targets in television imagery.Columbus, Ohio: North American Aviation, NA63H-794, January, 1965.
4.
ColtmanJ. W.The specification of imaging properties by response to a sine wave inputThe Journal of the Optical Society of America, 1954, 6, 468–471
5.
CraigG. L.Vehicle detection on television: A laboratory experiment.China Lake, California: Naval Weapons Center, NWC TP 5636, April, 1975.
6.
EliasM. F.SnadowskiA. M.RizyE. F.Identification of televised symbols as a function of symbol resolutionPerceptual and Motor Skills, 1965, 21, 91–99
7.
EricksonR. A.HemingwayJ. C.Relative effects of raster scan lines and image subtense on symbol legibility on televisionHuman Factors, 1969, 2, 331–338
8.
EricksonR. A.HemingwayJ. C.Image identification on television.China Lake, California: Naval Weapons Center, NWC TP 5025, September, 1970.
9.
EricksonR. A.LintonP. M.HemingwayJ. C.Human factors experiments with television.China Lake, California: Naval Weapons Center, NWC TP 4573, October, 1968.
10.
GrahamC. H.Vision and visual perception.New York: Wiley,1965.
11.
Honeywell. Improved reconnaissance display techniques (ELITE LOOK). Wright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio: Air Force Armament Laboratory, AFAL-TR-68–105, April, 1968.
12.
HumesJ. M.BauerschmidtD. K.Low light level TV viewfinder simulation program, phase B: The effects of television system characteristics upon operator target recognition performance.Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio: Air Force Avionics Laboratory, AFAL-TR-68–271, November, 1968.
13.
JamesT. H.The theory of the photographic process (3rd ed.). New York: MacMillan, 1966.
14.
JohnsonJ.Analysis of image forming systems. Paper presented at the Image Intensifier Symposium, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, October, 1958.
15.
JohnsonJ.LawsonW.Performance modeling methods and problems. Proceedings of the IRIS Specialty Group on IR Imagery. Research Institute of Michigan, Report No. 107600–5-X, January, 1974.
16.
KellR. D.BedfordA. V.TrainerM. A.An experimental television systemProceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers, 1934, 22, 1246–1251
17.
KellyR. B.WinterbergR. P.BondN. A.Evaluation of three character styles for closed circuit television display.Stamford, Connecticut: Dunlap and Associates,1959.
18.
LacyL. A.Effect of raster scan lines, image subtense, and target orientation on aircraft identification on television.China Lake, California: Naval Weapons Center, NWC TP 5763, May, 1975.
19.
LevineS. H.JaverR. A.KozlowskiD. R.Observer performance with TV imagery: Gray scale and resolution.St. Louis, Missouri: McDonnell Aircraft Company, Report H398, AD 744 487, September, 1969.
20.
LevineS. H.JaverR. A.KozlowskiD. R.Human factors requirements for electronic display: effects of S/N ratio and TV lines over targets.St. Louis, Missouri: McDonnell Aircraft Company, Report AO 217, AD 744 486, January, 1970.
21.
SherrS.Fundamentals of display system design.New York: Wiley-Interscience,1970.
22.
StathacopoulosA. D.Review of mathematical models of air-to-ground target acquisition using TV and FLIR sensors.China Lake, California: Naval Weapons Center, NWC TP 5840, January, 1976.
23.
WagnerD. W.Target acquisition with color versus black and white television.China Lake, California: Naval Weapons Center. NWC TP 5800, October, 1975.
24.
WhitehurstH. O.Ship recognition range on television: Effects of sun position, ship orientation, and wake size.China Lake, California: Naval Weapons Center, NWC TM 2964, October, 1976.
