I can tell that you have never been under stress in a cockpit. There are many things in your criticism that while correct in principles, are wrong in practice. I will let this subject go for a little longer. But for now, I suggest you look up the science of HUD symbology and its companion subject of semiotics.
Yankee can slaughter our airforce if we don't develop J20, God bless China.
New Recruit
High commands(CMC and HQ PLAAF) are said to be extremely satisfied with J-20.
. After seeing the flight videos of J-20, only a fool could still believe J-20 is "underpowered".
New Recruit
"even with such a low thrust-to-weight ratio" LOL. Very funny.
I can tell from this response that you have not done what I suggested.
No, you cannot, because...
...Unless you are an end-user, like a pilot that uses a HUD, even a civilian HUD, and THEN you uses different HUD designs for different missions, you are in no position to judge the quality of displays and functionalities.
I understand that you are on a zealot's mission to denigrate the F-35 as much as possible, but here is where you have gone beyond your expertise of software engineering and you made yourself look foolish.
Another issue with your street signs argument is that as the driver changes direction or just move straight ahead, those visual information cues eventually disappears from his FOV.
What happens when a viewer, car driver or aircraft pilot, switches from non-HUD to HUD focus, it is found that the viewer processes information best at very close distance despite the HUD symbol being collimated to optical infinity. This switching action occurs constantly so to minimize the odds of HUD-induced SOD, all the more reasons why HUD symbols should be simple to the point of being little more than short lines.
Sorry, but your opinion is worthless, and I say that kindly.
I can tell from this response that you have not done what I suggested.
So let us begin your education...
No, you cannot, because...
...Unless you are an end-user, like a pilot that uses a HUD, even a civilian HUD, and THEN you uses different HUD designs for different missions, you are in no position to judge the quality of displays and functionalities.
I understand that you are on a zealot's mission to denigrate the F-35 as much as possible, but here is where you have gone beyond your expertise of software engineering and you made yourself look foolish.
Do you wonder why the HUD real estate, despite decades of use and continuous development, remains relatively the same, meaning the glass dimensions ?
In the above illustration, there are four fields of views (FOV)...
- Left monocular
- Right monocular
- Combined binocular
- Intersect binocular
Left and right monocular are obvious enough.
Combined binocular is the total of both monocular views, from extreme left all the way to extreme right.
Intersect binocular is that overlapping area and THAT is the reason why HUD real estate have remained the same all these decades.
Basic research have determined that while there are variations among pilots regarding how capable is a pilot in processing data in their eyes' FOVs, there is a commonality that in all humans, we can only process FOV data in very limited quantity restricted by biology -- the iris. HUD real estates have varied from design to design, but no real changes have been made.
Inside the Int-FOV are two more factors that limits HUD real estate: Design Eye Reference Point (DERP) and Alert Eye Reference Point (AERP).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_Eye_Position
For most people, not just pilots, the AERP is physically higher than the DERP, meaning we focused on a region that is higher in the HUD than what the HUD's designer's intended because he/they wanted to accommodate the variations of end-users.
Do you wonder why HUD symbology is that green, some call it 'alien', color ?
Because research consistently found that this 'alien green' color contrasts well against background colors, from blue sky to Earth.
When we put the two questions together, we get the high level answer on why the HUD is the way it is all these decades.
If we put different colors into the HUD, as you wanted with your street signs argument, there is a high risk of having vital information get masked by background colors, leading to something that every pilot will experienced to some degrees in their flying careers -- HUD induced spatial disorientation (SOD).
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20040065771.pdf
Another issue with your street signs argument is that as the driver changes direction or just move straight ahead, those visual information cues eventually disappears from his FOV.
For the HUD, vital flight and target information must remain inside that Int-FOV at all times, creating the necessity that HUD symbols must be as simple as possible. This simplicity need is so important that symbol sizes are measured in MILLIRADIANS. Every pixel that a symbol demands must be justified, in both information necessity and size to convey that critical information, or the symbol is not designed in at all.
Another issue is symbol clutter that says all symbols must be as simple as possible. In contrast to popular belief, HUD symbol clutter does not mean the quantity of symbols, but SYMBOL CONFLICTS, in other words, even if there are only two symbols in view, if they collide and overlap, vital information could be lost. That constitutes clutter.
In the event that symbols cannot help but overlap, we have to determine which symbol representing which information should be suppressed. We have to create a table listing information priority which further demands that symbols be as simple as possible to minimize memory allocation. A symbol is suppressed then re-init in a few milliseconds. It should be as simple as possible for that re-initialization.
Another issue that demands HUD symbols to be as simple as possible is called the 'accommodation trap' or 'attention trap'.
http://www.mvs.net/pdf/Human_Factors_of_HUDs.pdf
What happens when a viewer, car driver or aircraft pilot, switches from non-HUD to HUD focus, it is found that the viewer processes information best at very close distance despite the HUD symbol being collimated to optical infinity. This switching action occurs constantly so to minimize the odds of HUD-induced SOD, all the more reasons why HUD symbols should be simple to the point of being little more than short lines.
Sorry, but your opinion is worthless, and I say that kindly.
From my time on the F-16, I know what 9-g feels like and as my vision narrows due to blood losses under g, I do not want complex symbols representing target information, and if I am under 9-g, that target is definitely hostile.
Support China all you want, but stay out of areas you know nothing about.
