Comparing Pilot Training Perfomance in Immersive and Non-Immersive Viirtual Environments

Abstract

This research investigated whether there was equal improvement for instrument pilot skill trained under an immersive virtual environment (IVE) versus a nonimmersive virtual environment (NIVE). In the IVE, sensory input to the human from external world is provided by head mounted displays, while NIVEs are represented by desktop displays. Subjects were tested in IVE and NIVE flight scenarios using three flying tasks—normal crosswind approach and landing (NCAL), go-around (GA) and constant speed during climbing and descending (CSCD). Error rate data were analyzed for four pilot control tasks. The results show that NIVE provides error rate reduction for training altitude control under NCAL and GA tasks, and vertical speed control for CSCD. No significant differences were observed for both NIVE and IVE for vertical speed control. IVE showed error rate decrements for the rest of the tasks.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Albert

W. S.

Rensink

R. A.

Beusmans

J. M.

(1999). Learning relative directions between landmarks in a desktop virtual environment. Spatial Cognition and Computation, 1, 131–144.

Harper

S. D.

(1991). Comparison of the training transfer of a personal computer based simulator and a FAA approved simulator in a general aviation aircraft. Dayton, OH: Wright State University.

Hennessy

L. W.

III Wise

J. A.

Koonce

J. M.

(1995). The effects of a pathway-in-the-sky display on the performance of a two-axis tracking task by instrument-rated pilots. In Jensen

R. S.

Rakovan

L. A.

(Eds.), Proceedings of the Eight International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 1073–1077). Columbus, OH: the Ohio State University.

Patrick

Cosgrove

Slavkovic

Rode

J. A.

Verratti

Chiselko

(2000). Using a large rojection screen as an alternative to head-mounted displays for virtual environments. Human Factors in Computing Systems: CHI Conference Proceedings (124-29). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.

Pimental

Teixera

(1995). Virtual reality: Through the new looking glass. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Presson

C. C.

Montello

D. R.

(1994). Updating after rotational and translational body movements: Coordinate structure of perspective space. Perception, 23, 1447–445.

Rieser

J. J.

(1989). Access to knowledge of spatial structure at novel points of observation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15, 1157–1165.

Rieser

J. J.

Lockman

J. L.

Pick

H. L.

Jr. (1980). The role of visual experience in knowledge of spatial layout. Perception & Psychophysics, 28, 185–190.

Rose

F. D.

Attree

E. A.

(2000). Training in virtual environments: Transfer to real world tasks and equivalence to real task training. Ergonomics, 43 (4), 494–512.

10.

Ruddle

R. A.

Payne

S. J.

Jones

D. M.

(1999). Navigating large-scale virtual environments: What differences occur between helmet-mounted and desktop displays? Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 8 (2), 157–168.