An Exploratory Evaluation of General Aviation Pilot Performance and Preferences Using Synthetic Vision Displays for Approaches and Missed Approaches in Flat and Challenging Terrain

Abstract

Eight instrument-rated General Aviation pilots completed CAT I SA approaches to Oklahoma City (KOKC) and localizer approaches to Aspen (KASE), the latter with missed approaches. Approaches to KOKC were conducted in two levels of runway visual range (RVR) with two decision heights (DH) using a head-up or head-down display with Synthetic Vision (SV) imagery. The lower DH led to significantly more completed approaches while the higher DH regularly caused pilots to execute missed approaches. RVR was not a significant factor for those values examined. Although SV was expected to be more beneficial for missed approaches in mountainous terrain (KASE) than for initial approaches, terrain clearance achieved was not influenced by display format. Cross-track and glide-slope root-mean-square error for the approaches to KOKC did not differ reliably between display conditions. Pilots uniformly believed they could successfully and comfortably complete approaches in lower visibilities if SV equipped as compared with other displays.