Slashdot Mirror
RAF Pilots Blinded At 1000 Mph By Helmet Technical Glitch
codeusirae writes "RAF pilots were left 'blinded' by a barrage of images while flying at speeds of over 1,000 mph when a number of technical glitches hit their high-tech helmets. The visors were supposed to provide the fighter pilots with complete vision and awareness, but problems with the display produced a blurring known as 'green-glow,' meaning they were unable to see clearly.The green glow occurred when a mass of information was displayed on the helmet-mounted display systems, including radar pictures and images from cameras mounted around the aircraft."
our pollies do it all the time!
I got to the chocolate box before you, that's why the hard ones have teeth marks.
Is this a good thing or a bad thing?
Sort it out. This isn't a tabloid.
Glitches happen. I'd assume there's an easy to reach switch that would make the visor of the helmet transparent.
"a Jedi's strength flows from the Force." while training Luke (a statement he would repeat in Return of the Jedi); Yoda also explains that "you must feel the Force around you." During their battle in Cloud City, Darth Vader tells Luke "The Force is with you, young Skywalker, but you are not a Jedi yet." Finally, Luke says "May the Force be with you" at the end of the movie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_(Star_Wars)
They've gone into plaid
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
Relying exclusively on electronic technology introduce a single point of point of failure. Fly by wires, car ecu etc.
Not being able to fall back to some kind of manual mechanical control introduces all kinds of vulnerabilities. Whether it is a glitch in the software, solar flares, aliens or something else ;-)
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/10/29/208205/toyotas-killer-firmware
http://www.ecutesting.com/toyota.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/ufo/8026971/Aliens-have-deactivated-British-and-US-nuclear-missiles-say-US-military-pilots.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fly-by-wire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_control_unit
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Hard to focus on flying when your helmet has a green glow
So the helmet is providing these signals throughout the whole flight, that they're up to 1,000 mph never has any weight in the article. I don't get it. It's a helmet, why test it in Florida if you're going to use it in England? And why scrap a project based on such a small problem? Much like the helmet, the article isn't clear. Maybe I'm blinded, too.
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
On their HUDs. Hard to fly at 1000 MPH when there's a horny old man chasing a blond in a miniskirt across your visor.
Amber CRTs are easier on the eyes...
I've got better things to do tonight than die.
So what did you do today?
Oh nothing, just flew 1000 MPH completely blind.
... and in the DRM, bind them.
So after reading the article, it was quite hard to tell whether the problem was information overload or a buggy display system. The relevant quote is:
âoeBut for now, thereâ(TM)s only so much data you can put in front of the pilotâ(TM)s eyes before it all merges, especially at night. He or she has got to take in information about their speed, altitude, dive and climb angles, and manage their fuel levels and weapons systems. Add images of the surrounding airspace and it all becomes too much. Essentially, the pilots were being blinded.â
The reporter seems to take the phrase "green glow" literally, rather than figuratively. The blinding referred to in the quote is information overload. The 1,000 mph figure seems merely illustrative, rather than a point at which the helmets suddenly malfunctioned. Information overload is a serious problem for pilots and must be considered in aircraft design, but this appears to be a case of poor design rather than the display failing in mid flight. Perhaps someone out there has better information.
Sort it out. This isn't a tabloid.
Are you sure. Everything about this report seems very tabloid-ish. Though the article claims that pilots were "left blinded", it would seem far more likely that they were momentarily blinded by an unexpected bright light or possibly only electronically "blinded" because their HUDs turned solid green.
I don't believe that the pilots lost their sense of sight for more than a few seconds, if at all. This much hyperbole smacks of tabloidism.
He doesn't understand that "electronics" is not a single system; in digital fly by wire aircraft, they are very redundant systems, with the only single point of failure being the pilot and the hardware connected to the pilot. Physically separated processors, physically separated busses, airgapped power busses on multi-engine aircraft, separate actuators, redundant flight control surfaces in most, etc. The "wings" I guess are each a single point of failure, but they also have quite a bit of redundancy; tested to 175% of maximum designed loads.
How did they limit sensory overload?
I have flown with the current generation Joint Helmet Mounted Cuing System (JHMCS) not the F-35 system, but here is what I can tell you.
1- JHMCS has a one button HOTAS blanking. I am sure F-35 has the something similar. Which means if the symbology gets to be too much you can blank it with a single button push and you are back to a regular old airplane. With JHMCS you will be in a fighter with a HUD for backup, like F-15 or FA-18, while in F-35 you will have to rely on your head-down display, but the airplane keeps flying just fine at 150Kts, 500Kts, 1000kts. It really doesn't matter.
2- The article doesn't really address the fundamental problem. F-35 was designed for the helmet to be the primary flight reference (main instrument), and has no HUD. Like I said, I fly with JHMCS, and it is an awesome tool. The advantage of being able to point your weapon system wherever you look, and likewise have your weapon system point your eyes on target can not be overstated. That being said, it is not good enough to fly instruments. Pointing errors, alignment problems, finicky connectors, etc. are more than just trivial technical problems to be solved. Small shifts or changes in sitting height make minor (0.5 to 1 degree) pointing errors. I routinely adjust alignment at least 2 times a flight.
The decision to have no HUD was (as I understand) based on weight, and it was a bad one. We were putting HUDs+gyros in airplanes for a couple generations before we trusted the HUD alone to be the Primary Flight Reference. Should have done the same thing with helmets.
"I don't believe that the pilots lost their sense of sight for more than a few seconds, if at all. This much hyperbole smacks of tabloidism."
Do you have any reliable citations for these believes?
-1? Come on, it's just a lighthearted joke.
Soooo reading slashdot is just like flying 1000 mph?
-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ *** http://www.mountainfort.com *** +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-
There's a disclaimer right on the sunglasses that reads "Do not download the interesect while piloting your aircraft".
I fly single engine propeller aircraft with a Vne (Velocity never exceed) of maybe 220mph, but cruising generally about 130mph. The idea of losing vision at that speed is pretty horrible, but at 1000mph it would be terrifying no matter how experienced or brave you are.
When Chuck Yeager was flying the X-1 one time his windows froze up and he could not see out, but at least he still had instruments and landed safely with the help of his chase plane. Not being able to actually see is a big level above that.
Perfectly sensible, it's much safer.
After all, what's the chance of them all going wrong?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Relying exclusively on electronic technology introduce a single point of point of failure. Fly by wires, car ecu etc.
Fly/Drive-by-wire only has a single point of failure if you design it that way. Fly-by-Wire systems are regularly designed to be multiply redundant or even have mechanical backups. Because fly-by-wire is typically lighter it is often possible to have more safety systems in place. Mechanical systems despite seeming dependable are often actually less reliable if you actually bother to check the data. It's all in how the product is designed. Sometimes a single point of failure is the only option but more often it is a choice rather than a necessity.
/. Please,lease, please write better titles! I know you want people to read your articles, but this title looked like the pilot's eyesight was permanantly lost, not that there was a green glow making it hard to read.
Dogfight? What century do you think this is? I'm not really an expert, but my understanding of modern air battles is that they launch missiles at each other from extremely long distances.
That's what they thought would happen around the time of the Vietnam war. They even went so far as to remove the guns from the fighter aircraft. Turned out they were full of shit. Missiles did not eliminate the need for air combat maneuvering (aka a dogfight) and actually put their pilots at a disadvantage at times. These lessons were a big part of the reason why pilot schools like TOPGUN were created. Even the most modern fighters like the F22 carry onboard 20mm cannons to this day.
Apparently so...
We scrapped (most of) ours, then bought a whole bunch of stuff from the US (at great expense)
Welcome to Runway UK!
I blame Windows 8.1 .
I only read the synopsis... did they get directed to an adult website without pop-up blocker enabled?
in 2011 BEA was hired to development an alternate helmet. Basically the contractor developing the original helmet was falling behind so BEA was hired to create one to scare them straight. Pretty common tactic which seems to have worked as the primary helmet seems to be up to snuff now. BEA knew this would be the likely outcome which would explain things perhaps not being up to snuff.
The link to the Independent appears broken and all I can find is a story in the Daily Mail which seems to be a bit of a rag: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2485533/Technical-fault-left-RAF-pilots-unable-flying-100-million-aircraft.html#comments
Can anyone tell when the "blinding" incident actually happened? Daily Mail appears to imply the BAE helmet program was de-funded as a result but there's no way the government could move that fast.
The Joo Janta 200 Super-Chromatic Peril Sensitive Helmets have been designed to help people develop a relaxed attitude to danger. They work by turning completely dark at the first sign of danger, thus preventing you from seeing anything that might alarm you. This feature also works during dog fights,missile attacks and takeoff and landing....
I'm shocked. Shocked and dismayed.