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."

6 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. Where's the manual override? by nikhilhs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Glitches happen. I'd assume there's an easy to reach switch that would make the visor of the helmet transparent.

  2. Re:Relying exclusively on electronic technology by dunkelfalke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The pilot is already a single point of failure.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  3. Re:Relying exclusively on electronic technology by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fly by wire has multiple redundancies. It's not a single point of failure any more than hydraulic control system is.

  4. Re:Relying exclusively on electronic technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's how I approach things: If there's already 1 single point of failure, why not introduce a bunch of others?

  5. Re:Relying exclusively on electronic technology by felipekk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    He means that the whole system depends on "electronics". For him a better option would be electronics + hydraulics as a backup or something. In any case, the story is about the helmet. The pilot can always take it off...

  6. Re:Hyperbole tabloidism? by Threni · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Believes" don't require citations. He's not quoting anyone else; he's stating his opinion. If someone says that their microwave oven killed their dog, who was in the garden, and you say that you don't believe that the microwave was the cause, you would be unable to produce a citation (as it was you making the claim), nor would the onus be on you to do so.