FLIR video
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FLIR video
Although it's fixed-wing, an interesting video.
Night VFR landing at Aspen, Colorado.
Left side - FLIR Landing system presentation. (Or EVS - see next post)
Right Side - View out of the cockpit.
Includes RT.
It's a big file. For best results, download and save the file to your hard disk before playing.
Video
Night VFR landing at Aspen, Colorado.
Left side - FLIR Landing system presentation. (Or EVS - see next post)
Right Side - View out of the cockpit.
Includes RT.
It's a big file. For best results, download and save the file to your hard disk before playing.
Video
Heliport,
Are you sure this was a F16 military plane, having flown them in a previous life never had this kind of headup display nor call out of heights on landing.
I think it might be a Gulfstream fitted with their EVS (enhanced vision system).
Greetings,
Finalchecksplease
Are you sure this was a F16 military plane, having flown them in a previous life never had this kind of headup display nor call out of heights on landing.
I think it might be a Gulfstream fitted with their EVS (enhanced vision system).
Greetings,
Finalchecksplease
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That certainly is a G550 Enhanced Vision System demo tape, using FLIR and TV side by side to show the situational awareness enhancement. With the EVS installed, the crew can let down below landing mins on an ILS to 100 feet, since the FAA has decreed that the EVS image constitutes visual of the runway environment.
The original of this video, and others, can be see at the Gulfstream site:
http://www.gulfstream.com/product_enhancement/evs/
Next stop, a full synthetic vision cockpit, retrofitable into the PlaneView machines, with a head's down view to compare with the head's up FLIR picture. And helicopters have........?
The original of this video, and others, can be see at the Gulfstream site:
http://www.gulfstream.com/product_enhancement/evs/
Next stop, a full synthetic vision cockpit, retrofitable into the PlaneView machines, with a head's down view to compare with the head's up FLIR picture. And helicopters have........?
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and helicopters have...
A speed hold that can take you close to fast walking pace with any kind of wind...You don't see many helos diverting, really only when the RVR drops below approach minima. Would still like the gadgets though and a cocktail bar like on the Gulfstream.
A speed hold that can take you close to fast walking pace with any kind of wind...You don't see many helos diverting, really only when the RVR drops below approach minima. Would still like the gadgets though and a cocktail bar like on the Gulfstream.
And when you can find an IR camera or TV camera that can see through cloud and rain then this might be a useful step forward!
And when you can find an IR camera or TV camera that can see through cloud and rain then this might be a useful step forward!
Dont know about the results of these tests, but havent heard anything about it for a long time.
skadi
Hence my post Skadi - the video is a very pretty view of an airfield approach in the dark but the question is ..when would you use FLIR to make an approach?
If the weather is on or below instrument minima, the FLIR won't see the ground for the reason you mentioned so you will have to divert anyway.
If it is for night use then you need to ensure that you only use it when you have good conditions for IR - no recent rain, no thermal crossover etc - you are far better off with normal instruments or NVG. The Apache uses millimetric wave radar which can see most things (not wires unfortunately) but that is a rather expensive option I think.
If the weather is on or below instrument minima, the FLIR won't see the ground for the reason you mentioned so you will have to divert anyway.
If it is for night use then you need to ensure that you only use it when you have good conditions for IR - no recent rain, no thermal crossover etc - you are far better off with normal instruments or NVG. The Apache uses millimetric wave radar which can see most things (not wires unfortunately) but that is a rather expensive option I think.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
crab misses the point, only because he thinks the FLIR is meant to replace instruments. Not so. In fact, that is where this thread went south, IMHO.
The use of a FLIR or Low Light Level TV image to aid the crew in situational awareness is the issue. No doubt, instruments keep you on track, but too many accidents result from the crew losing the "big picture"
Too many CFIT accidents are preventable, using technology that is cheap enough and reliable enough to make a big difference. The FLIR doesn't have to see thru clouds and rain to save a great percentage of helo drivers, according to accident stats (although one wishes for theat extra capability!)
About 25 years ago I started Sikorsky on the path of developing what became the Comanche helmet. The whims of the Army stopped that system from hitting the street, but it will come, and when it does, it will revolutionize our flight capability and safety.
The use of a FLIR or Low Light Level TV image to aid the crew in situational awareness is the issue. No doubt, instruments keep you on track, but too many accidents result from the crew losing the "big picture"
Too many CFIT accidents are preventable, using technology that is cheap enough and reliable enough to make a big difference. The FLIR doesn't have to see thru clouds and rain to save a great percentage of helo drivers, according to accident stats (although one wishes for theat extra capability!)
About 25 years ago I started Sikorsky on the path of developing what became the Comanche helmet. The whims of the Army stopped that system from hitting the street, but it will come, and when it does, it will revolutionize our flight capability and safety.
Too many sources of information in the cockpit could stop the pilot doing what he is paid for Nick - flying the aircraft.
Ideally we would all like a super-duper, head up display or helmet mounted display with all the aircraft symbology superimposed on a composite TV/FLIR/NVG image but the pilot still has to fly the aircraft with reference to flight instruments however they are presented - it is usually a failure to do this properly that results in CFIT.
Ideally we would all like a super-duper, head up display or helmet mounted display with all the aircraft symbology superimposed on a composite TV/FLIR/NVG image but the pilot still has to fly the aircraft with reference to flight instruments however they are presented - it is usually a failure to do this properly that results in CFIT.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are right crab. Info is not enough. The flight display in Comanche was a dual eye heads up display on the helmet that comprised the flight and power instruments as well as the imagery. If these were all separate, it would be unworkable.
The image was also "space stabilized" so that it showed the image that the pilot would see thru the windows, unlike a fixed HUD image(which would be a real problem if the pilot saw the same forward image when the pilot turned his head. The image was also roll and pitch stabilized, so it stayed glued to the horizon if the pilot rolled his head. the effect was a virtual reality view of the battlefield, similar to that from a very good simulator.
This type display is coming, I would expect it to be cheap enough and available within a decade or so. With synthetic vision and TCAS/ADS data, it could very well nearly replace the windows, especially for night and IFR.
The image was also "space stabilized" so that it showed the image that the pilot would see thru the windows, unlike a fixed HUD image(which would be a real problem if the pilot saw the same forward image when the pilot turned his head. The image was also roll and pitch stabilized, so it stayed glued to the horizon if the pilot rolled his head. the effect was a virtual reality view of the battlefield, similar to that from a very good simulator.
This type display is coming, I would expect it to be cheap enough and available within a decade or so. With synthetic vision and TCAS/ADS data, it could very well nearly replace the windows, especially for night and IFR.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
If I can take Nick's comments one step further - where are the approaches to a 50' hover that were demonstrated far too many years ago?
The helicopter world is simply not interested in picking up this stuff because the relative cost of the systems in comparison to airframe cost is high, with many pilots and senior folks not seeing any operational advantage to fitting something like a FLIR or low light TV. A Gulfstream operation operates an expensive piece of equipment and anything that enhances the capability to get the boss where he wants is measured carefully and added if the benefits outweigh the costs.
I doubt that is done much in the helicopter world because we don't get much chance to see the benefits.
I know of one Middle Eastern operator who fitted a mini-low-light TV system to their machine after they nearly ran into a blacked out rig over the water one night... Not expensive, and very nice insurance. Why doesn't every EMS helicopter have it?
Sorry for the rant, but when are we going to wake up???
The helicopter world is simply not interested in picking up this stuff because the relative cost of the systems in comparison to airframe cost is high, with many pilots and senior folks not seeing any operational advantage to fitting something like a FLIR or low light TV. A Gulfstream operation operates an expensive piece of equipment and anything that enhances the capability to get the boss where he wants is measured carefully and added if the benefits outweigh the costs.
I doubt that is done much in the helicopter world because we don't get much chance to see the benefits.
I know of one Middle Eastern operator who fitted a mini-low-light TV system to their machine after they nearly ran into a blacked out rig over the water one night... Not expensive, and very nice insurance. Why doesn't every EMS helicopter have it?
Sorry for the rant, but when are we going to wake up???
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Albuquerque NM USA
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr. Coyle:
>If I can take Nick's comments one step further - where are the approaches to a 50' hover that were demonstrated far too many years ago?
I guess my question to you is how much actual helicopter flying is done IFR as a percentage of all helicopter flying, let alone needing the capability to a 50’ hover?
An earlier thread went through this a few months ago. It isn’t the IFR portion of the flight that’s killing us, it’s the trying to maintain the VFR part during the day and just running into stuff at night. You also need a more expensive machine for all that capability to do the exact same job we do with single-engine helicopters. I refer to EMS flying.
If a helicopter pilot can see where he’s going regardless of bad decision making concerning weather and darkness, doesn’t that solve the problem?
>I know of one Middle Eastern operator who fitted a mini-low-light TV system to their >machine after they nearly ran into a blacked out rig over the water one night... Not expensive, and very nice insurance.
Why didn’t they just buy themselves some NVGs and be done with it instead of a low light TV system?
>Why doesn't every EMS helicopter have it?
Money is the simple answer. Aircraft useful load another. Regulations a third. The entire weight of two sets of NVGs and aircraft lighting for the AStar I fly is maybe 10 pounds. NVGs less than 10K USD a set. Pound of pound, dollar for dollar, there is no other better safety tool we have right now regarding situational awareness after dark.
>Sorry for the rant, but when are we going to wake up???
When the insurance companies and the government weigh in.
Regards from New Mexico,
Ron Powell
>If I can take Nick's comments one step further - where are the approaches to a 50' hover that were demonstrated far too many years ago?
I guess my question to you is how much actual helicopter flying is done IFR as a percentage of all helicopter flying, let alone needing the capability to a 50’ hover?
An earlier thread went through this a few months ago. It isn’t the IFR portion of the flight that’s killing us, it’s the trying to maintain the VFR part during the day and just running into stuff at night. You also need a more expensive machine for all that capability to do the exact same job we do with single-engine helicopters. I refer to EMS flying.
If a helicopter pilot can see where he’s going regardless of bad decision making concerning weather and darkness, doesn’t that solve the problem?
>I know of one Middle Eastern operator who fitted a mini-low-light TV system to their >machine after they nearly ran into a blacked out rig over the water one night... Not expensive, and very nice insurance.
Why didn’t they just buy themselves some NVGs and be done with it instead of a low light TV system?
>Why doesn't every EMS helicopter have it?
Money is the simple answer. Aircraft useful load another. Regulations a third. The entire weight of two sets of NVGs and aircraft lighting for the AStar I fly is maybe 10 pounds. NVGs less than 10K USD a set. Pound of pound, dollar for dollar, there is no other better safety tool we have right now regarding situational awareness after dark.
>Sorry for the rant, but when are we going to wake up???
When the insurance companies and the government weigh in.
Regards from New Mexico,
Ron Powell
