Cool attitude indicator

Kev wrote:

I believe NASA's done studies showing that if you simply had the
current AI's "wings" tilt towards the side you were turning, pilots had
no problem instantly understanding their situation.

The very first AIs, then developed in Germany, worked that way, and
studies seem to imply that it's more intuitive. This design is still in
use in the countries of the former soviet union and their region of
influence. The AI as it is known in our part of the world was designed
by Sperry, IIRC, and I think it was at least partly a matter of
copyright to do it the way they have.

Pilots who were trained in eastern Europe and then are hired by western
companies have to be retrained, which is extremely difficult. In a
stress situation, you allways tend to fall back to the procedures
learned in primary training. There was at least one airliner crash which
was the direct result of this: Easterly trained pilots flying a westerly
equipped plane with inadequate training, consequently misinterpreting
the AI in a situation of high workload. The report is well worth a
reading: http://www.bfu.admin.ch/common/pdf/1781_e

Stefan

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 20:26:14 +0200, Stefan
wrote:

Kev wrote:

I believe NASA's done studies showing that if you simply had the
current AI's "wings" tilt towards the side you were turning, pilots had
no problem instantly understanding their situation.

The very first AIs, then developed in Germany, worked that way, and
studies seem to imply that it's more intuitive. This design is still in
use in the countries of the former soviet union and their region of
influence. The AI as it is known in our part of the world was designed
by Sperry, IIRC, and I think it was at least partly a matter of
copyright to do it the way they have.

Pilots who were trained in eastern Europe and then are hired by western
companies have to be retrained, which is extremely difficult. In a
stress situation, you allways tend to fall back to the procedures
learned in primary training. There was at least one airliner crash which
was the direct result of this: Easterly trained pilots flying a westerly
equipped plane with inadequate training, consequently misinterpreting
the AI in a situation of high workload. The report is well worth a
reading: http://www.bfu.admin.ch/common/pdf/1781_e

I have a buddy with a PhD in human-factors engineering (Purdue). I
gather from him that the phenomenon of figure-ground reversal as it
relates to flight instruments has been studied to death through the
years, There must be a couple of standard texts. I'll ask him the
next time I talk to him if I don't have a brain-fart.

I also imagine there's a lot of documentation at the Air Force Flight
Test Center at Edwards, but it's probably hard to search for.

Don

The very first AIs, then developed in Germany, worked that way, and
studies seem to imply that it's more intuitive.

that's a funny statement. I worked for a Germany company for 5 years
and lived in MUC for a couple. German engineering is great if it has
been refined for many years like their automotive companies. Newer
German designed equipment makes no sense at all. My company had
some equipment with left-handed screws (worse yet it would jam if
you "opened" the screw by turning it to the left when locked).
I just did my German taxes using a German program. To go forward,
you would hit the Zuruck button which means "back." Even my German
friend who was helping me told me to "Shut up. I know it's crazy.
It's German."

nevertheless, having the plane tilt is probably a better concept.
After all, on the TC, the plane moves and not the backing. Now
that I am programmed for the non-USSR-designed AI, I'll stick with it
as I can't imagine how long it would take for me to change.

Gerald Sylvester

To go forward,
you would hit the Zuruck button which means "back."

I'm contemplating the bottom left of my computer screen, and thinking of
Abbot and Costello.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

G. Sylvester wrote:

I just did my German taxes using a German program. To go forward,
you would hit the Zuruck button which means "back."

I know a cetain operating system which requires you to click on "start"
to turn it off... Incidentally, it's not a German design.
:-P

Stefan

"Stefan" wrote in message
...
I know a cetain operating system which requires you to click on "start" to
turn it off

It also requires you to click "start" to run programs. To change settings.
To view files. To search for files.

In other words, in that context, it ought to be pretty obvious to all but
the most dim-witted that you might find a whole host of interesting
functions, like turning off the computer, there.

Why people continue to insist bring this up as if it's some failure of user
interface design, I have no idea.

I have heard there's another OS that puts the "turn off" function under a
menu named "Special". What's so special about turning off the computer?
And why aren't activities that are truly special not found there?

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Stefan" wrote in message
...
I know a cetain operating system which requires you to click on "start"
to
turn it off

It also requires you to click "start" to run programs. To change
settings.
To view files. To search for files.

In other words, in that context, it ought to be pretty obvious to all but
the most dim-witted that you might find a whole host of interesting
functions, like turning off the computer, there.

Why people continue to insist bring this up as if it's some failure of
user
interface design, I have no idea.

I have heard there's another OS that puts the "turn off" function under a
menu named "Special". What's so special about turning off the computer?
And why aren't activities that are truly special not found there?

Pete

How about having to drag an icon of a diskette to the Trashcan to eject the
thing? Talk about intuitive!

Robert,

How about having to drag an icon of a diskette to the Trashcan to eject the
thing? Talk about intuitive!


Well, until this day I have this vague notion in the back of my head that it
will delete the contents rather than ejecting it whenever I do it. Very
disturbing.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:

How about having to drag an icon of a diskette to the Trashcan to eject the
thing? Talk about intuitive!

Well, until this day I have this vague notion in the back of my head that it
will delete the contents rather than ejecting it whenever I do it.

You still do? Interesting, since they've changed this a couple of years ago.

Stefan

Peter Duniho wrote:

"Stefan" wrote in message
...

I know a cetain operating system which requires you to click on "start" to
turn it off


It also requires you to click "start" to run programs. To change settings.
To view files. To search for files.

In other words, in that context, it ought to be pretty obvious to all but
the most dim-witted that you might find a whole host of interesting
functions, like turning off the computer, there.

Why people continue to insist bring this up as if it's some failure of user
interface design, I have no idea.

Because it IS a failure of UI design. Then again, to say that Windows
was designed, is to misuse the word in the first place.


Matt