Nigd3[QUOTE][RL - maybe you should update the much used/abused phrase of "thinking outside the box" to "thinking outside the xbox". /QUOTE]Clever. There's a giggle in that thought.
With regards your preference for the I-O ADI when actually flying, the publications I recomended may go some way to explaining this. When you lose certain sensory cues, that you have been extensively conditioned/trained to interpret, that are not represented in a sim or on a PC game, the brains natural preference regards the O-I as the more intuitive presentation.
First, I accept that I am extensively conditioned but I like to believe that my training and experience allows me to overcome this conditioning in the conduct of research and test. I have noted that there are several researchers and pilots who seem to share your preference for the O-I dispaly; yet my reading to date, admittedly limited to your recommend publications and about 10 other papers, seems to provide no real concensus for a clear Outside-In preference. It is early in my research so I have yet to reach any personal conclusions, but I am beginning to feel as if a simple comparison of design concepts will not be possible as there are too many variables in the published research to form a useful compartive matrix. I am, however, seeing a preference in some of the more recent documents for the Arc-Segmented Attitude Reference Display, which I am sure you are aware is classified as an Inside-Out concept. My real difficulty in comparing the various displays is that the published researched I have read to date are not conducted using a single standardized research protocal. Further, the tests never seem to evaluate more than one display and many use old technology or adapted computer displays. For instance, one uses a panel mounted display, another legacy instrument panel displays, another a computer screen, another HMD fixed or non-fixed, another full face visor (fixed and moving frame of reference), and still another point-in-space/infinity projection - yet most researchers use only one display for their tests and this introduces an obvious test bias. One might conclude using a panel mounted flat screen display that O-I is preferred while another using a helmet mounted HMD with superimposed and fused FLIR/IR imaging underlay and flight and navigation symbology overlay that an I-O is the preferred display protocal - which then becomes the design standard when both displays are available for the pilot to use? Sometimes the design choices are not so clear. Most aircraft companies understand that testing an infinite matrix is a bit cost prohibitive and that is why introduction of any new standard requires clear and convincing proof that the new standard as far superior to the old.