What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Heads-Up Display announced by GRT Avionics

G

Greg_Toman

Member
GRT Avionics is introducing the GRT Vision wearable Heads-Up Display (HUD) at Airventure 2015. President Greg Toman has been intensely involved with the development of this system that originally was inspired by the needs of agricultural pilots. Upon his first flight with the BT-200 Android smart glasses manufactured by Epson, it was clear to Greg that this is a giant step forward in instrumentation.

"Even with my previous background developing military fighter system around a heads-up display, where the benefits of such a display are well known, I was amazed to see what it means to actually fly with one. This will change general aviation. The instrument panel is quickly going to become nothing more than a backup to a wearable HUD."

GRT Avionics has developed the necessary software, and has become a re-seller of the Epson smart glasses. "We are not limiting our app to just the BT-200, and in fact have written it to make it quickly adaptable to future smart glasses. It is clear that this technology is perfect for aviation, is amazingly economical, and has reached the point where it meets the practical needs of the pilot, and is only going to get better."

Introductory pricing of $750 for the glasses and software have been announced for Airventure, with a 15-day no-risk return policy. Glasses can be fitted with prescription lenses, and include sunglass filters for daytime flying.

Click for GRT Avionics Web Page

wpe769bf63_05_06.jpg

Actual photo take through the Epson BT-200 glasses from the right seat of RV-6A N78PP. The glasses have proven to be usable under all lighting conditions, including full sunlight. (Photo was taken with development software that was not driving the flight path marker and wind indicator.)

wp8e92ca6c_06.png

Another early development photo. Although the flight path marker is not functioning in this photo, this photo shows the benefit of seeing the runway and instrument data at the same time. Not shown is a vertical bar graph that pop up when passing over the end of the runway that shows the runway remaining. Instrumentation, like runway remaining, were useless with heads-down displays because it was nearly impossible to look at it, and doing so could compromise control of the airplane on the landing roll-out. This is not the case with a heads-up display.

wp1cb4ab57_06.png
Aerobatics with wearable HUD technology will be unthinkable after having flown with them. This shouldn't be surprising, as military fighter pilots have relied on this for more than 40 years. Now it is our turn.
 
I've been saying for two or three years now that the next revolution in Experimental avionics was going to be the HUD. Congratulations to Greg and team for making it a reality.

Since my new HX is now in shipment from GRT, let's talk about what's required to make these fancy glasses work. Bluetooth adapter plugged into one of the HX's USB ports - that part seems fairly obvious. What else is needed?

Gotta love the HX's ability to support external Android devices! This is just the beginning, I'm sure.
 
rmartingt said:
Oooooooh, shiny!

How does the HUD display stabilize WRT the pilot's head movement?
Click to expand...

It most likely does not. Notice there is no 'synthetic vision' stuff displayed, just the conventional instruments. Any runways have to been seen visually. Now, if you wear their infrared glasses on top of the HUD glasses, ...
 
Looks cool but realistically I don't even want to see all my instrumentation at all times. Sometimes I'm just vfr buzzing and don't look down much. But I think it's cool either way. And yes I want a mini ems too
 
HUD Response and Impressions

Thanks for the posts and questions.

The GRT Vision app does not attempt to account for the pilots head position, so if you tilt your head, the images will tilt with your head. In flying with it, I didn't find that I tilted my head much, although I noticed in turns I did tilt opposite the turn a little. This is of no significance because the horizon displayed on the glasses has its own reference.

The development of the glasses fit in perfectly with our past planning and the future growth planning we have built into our EFIS systems. Having already developed the blue-tooth link to our app, and the experience with developing software on Android set us up perfectly for developing the wearable HUD. All GRT EFIS systems that have an "X" in their name (Sport SX, HX, HXr, Mini-X) can support the glasses, as can the mini-AP.

Our first release of software will not include engine data, but engine power (RPM and manifold pressure) will be added within a couple weeks or less. There are other features that will be added in the coming weeks also.

Engine monitoring has been added to the Mini now as part of a software upgrade package.

Flying with the glasses the first time was an unusual experience. I was unsure if I would feel comfortable taking off or landing with them, so I had planned to wait until I had another pilot with me. This was based on my impression of the glasses when I tried them at in the office (not impressive to me, or any co-workers), and in my car (intriguing that I could see data outside of the car, but the loss of peripheral vision made me uncomfortable when going through intersections).

When I first flew with the glasses, I started the engine with the glasses on, and found this simple. I could easily look under the glasses, or through them. Taxi was also simple, and I could see the images while taxiing into the sun. Wow! The loss of peripheral vision had no impact (I think that view might be blocked by my RV-6A wing anyway.) . So I took off. Again, no problem, and having data out the window just drew my attention out there.

On the flight home, I let my step-daughter try the glasses, and she liked them also. She is a 19-year old non-pilot who loves to fly, and her comment was, "when are you going to put navigation data on them?" Obviously she, like me, found that once the you saw data outside, you lost interest in looking back inside the airplane. It was natural to look on the glasses for everything, and it seems strange that is where your brain expects to find it.

This strange affect came into play for me also. As it turned out, I felt completely comfortable landing with the glasses on, so I did. I found I naturally tipped my head back, moving the HUD images above the runway as I flared. The strange part came upon touchdown. I looked back to the HUD images to see how much runway remained. That was odd, because that data was not on the glasses. I wrote the app, so I should know, yet I was naturally looking for it because, for the first time in my life, I could get access to information while controlling the airplane on the ground at high speed.

Naturally I have now added the runway remaining feature. It activates on takeoff also. The ability to see information without looking down at your instrument panel is a game changer.


Greg Toman
GRT Avionics/Grand Rapids Technologies
 
Gentex visor and crusing with wearable HUD.

I looked at the Gentex flight visor. My guess is that the Epson bt-200 glasses would fit within them, but I am not certain. Someone should bring a helmet and visor to our booth to try this out.

As for just cruising around, the software de-clutters automatically. For example, it does not show the selected approach speed or speed error bar until you are within 25% of the selected speed. No deviation scales are shown either.

Obstacles are not shown on HUD yet, but that is coming very soon, and that will be handy when cruising around. I find that my attention returns to airspeed whenever I pitch up and climb, no matter how shallow, when at low altitude. This means I would expect the HUD will be handy in this type of flying also. I know I like the HUD when flying along the coast of Lake Michigan at 100' above the lake. Seagulls are good at avoiding me if I say below 100 mph, so being able to see the birds and the airspeed is nice. :)

When enroute, the map/HSI in the lower left corner is handy for verifying/navigating on course.

So the long answer to the short question is, yes, I think you will like them for cruising around, and eventually you will have to land!

Thanks for the questions.

Greg Toman
 
Greg_Toman said:
Thanks for the posts and questions.

Engine monitoring has been added to the Mini now as part of a software upgrade package.

Greg Toman
GRT Avionics/Grand Rapids Technologies
Click to expand...

Engine monitoring on the Mini. That's awesome! I will be by your booth to take a look.
 
Very excited. I do have to say the price is very reasonable on the glasses and I never would have imagined it would be available with my mini x. Very cool, happy grt customer
 
Greg
Is the image on the glasses projected at infinity or do you have to focus up closer to read the image?
John
 
Great job Greg and crew ...

Chkaharyer99 said:
Engine monitoring on the Mini. That's awesome! I will be by your booth to take a look.
Click to expand...

I flew to Oshkosh on Friday with this software and it worked great!

There are a few other "features" but I will not spill the beans for GRT. :)

Regarding the glasses, I must say that Greg just could NOT stand to be challenged!!! :)

James
 
BobTurner said:
It most likely does not. Notice there is no 'synthetic vision' stuff displayed, just the conventional instruments. Any runways have to been seen visually. Now, if you wear their infrared glasses on top of the HUD glasses, ...
Click to expand...

Even without synthetic vision, I'd expect that my HUD symbology (pitch ladder, velocity vector, etc) would be fixed relative to the aircraft. It seems like it might be real disorienting with large head movements and/or if you aren't holding your head perfectly straight in IMC. I do realize that achieving that would take a lot more computing power and most likely some kind of head-tracking system.
 
Greg_Toman said:
Having already developed the blue-tooth link to our app, and the experience with developing software on Android set us up perfectly for developing the wearable HUD. All GRT EFIS systems that have an "X" in their name (Sport SX, HX, HXr, Mini-X) can support the glasses, as can the mini-AP.
Click to expand...

SO............if I am reading this correctly, any EFIS with an X is blue tooth capable????

Please elaborate on this feature---------is it just the software that is in the X models, or is the actual electronics there already??? Will I need to buy an extra bit of hardware???

Is this blue-tooth capability limited only to the glasses, or will it play with other stuff??

Is it two way communication-----------can I do my flight planning at home on the Ipad, and then link via blue-tooth to the HX, and download the flight plan???

Thanks in advance.
 
HUD

Greg,

Looked through the info on the website and not sure what the HUD glasses will do without any GRT Avionics. I have no GRT avionics in my -4, is this a stand alone system or do I need a GRT EFIS with Synthetic Vision?

I mostly fly VFR but when conditions dictate I can fly IFR and use an IPAD Mini with Foreflight for all the EFB chart requirements and the synthetic vision option.

Sure would be a cool aircraft addition if it is an out of the box stand alone system. This really would revolutionize GA flying, particularly experimentals.

Very interesting,
Oly
 
Mike S said:
SO............if I am reading this correctly, any EFIS with an X is blue tooth capable????

Please elaborate on this feature---------is it just the software that is in the X models, or is the actual electronics there already??? Will I need to buy an extra bit of hardware???

Is this blue-tooth capability limited only to the glasses, or will it play with other stuff??

Is it two way communication-----------can I do my flight planning at home on the Ipad, and then link via blue-tooth to the HX, and download the flight plan???

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Hi Mike,
They have had bluetooth capability for a while, it is a Blue tooth that connects to a USB port and communicate with other devices. I believe the first use for this was to connect to a Andriod tablet and it is a two way communication as you can send flight plan, etc to a GRT EIFS.
 
Greg_Toman said:
Engine monitoring has been added to the Mini now as part of a software upgrade package.
Click to expand...

Greg,
I am going to take a stab at clarifying your statement, and please correct me if I am wrong.

The software update you are referring to allows the Mini to show engine information that is sent over from the GRT EIS system via a serial link.

This is not the same as a Mini-EMS that is a stand alone unit that engine sensors plug into directly.

Correct?

-Dj
 
deej said:
This is not the same as a Mini-EMS that is a stand alone unit that engine sensors plug into directly.

Correct?

-Dj
Click to expand...

This latter option is what I am so dearly hoping GRT will develop and bring to market. This past week I came dangerously close to going the EIS route but I just can't bring myself to do it. I love my Mini and would buy a Mini-based EMS in a heartbeat, IF I didn't have to spend a grand on that clunky EIS box to go with it.
 
The MGL Xtreme EMS is a very similar size to the Mini. It uses a dedicated data acquisition box, which they call an RDAC, to terminate the sensor leads and communicate with the EMS. In this manner, it's similar to the EIS but apparently takes less programming.

I like the idea of having this sort of data acquisition box, since it offers the opportunity for easier sensor wire routing and less complication at the panel. My hope is that GRT will make a newer generation box than the EIS.

The Mini is small enough that any sort of split display would be hard for me to use, especially if I had a map up as well as the PFD. Best would be to offer a full-page EMS display. Then I could have a second Mini to be used as a dedicated EMS -- and a straightforward comparison could be made to the Xtreme EMS if anyone wanted to.

Dave
 
Wearable HUD image stabilized for head movement

As for the image being stabilized so it compensates for your head movement. Ideally this might be nice, but I didn't find not doing this to be any problem. I can't explain why it is this way, but that was my impression, and no one that has flown with me mentioned they wished the glasses accounted for their head movement. The usual responses I heard were related to wanting to see more data, and I felt that same desire also. This may be because the information on the glasses is easier to access than the data on the instrument panel.

I did not get any sense of dis-orientation either. I found that when I was concentrating on the data more intently (on approach for example), my head movement tended to be minimal. I also tended to ignore the data on the HUD when looking other directions.

I don't think I explained this well. What I am trying to communicate is that it is hard to imagine what it is like to use the wearable HUD glasses. I doubt most people will find it to be what they expect. Luckily it is getting inexpensive and easier to try out the new technologies. My guess is that in the end, there will be those that fly with glasses and those that don't, just like there are those that still fly with round instruments, and those that fly with glass.
Greg Toman
 
Using HUD glasses without GRT Avioncis EFIS?

The HUD glasses uses data (such as air data, attitude data, magnetic heading, engine data, etc) that the glasses can not provide. The data shown on the HUD also relies on pilot selections made on the EFIS, such as the selection of the runway for the synthetic approach guidance, or even the flight plan. While it is possible to do this on the glasses, I think it might not be practical in the cockpit environment.

Greg Toman
 
Focus of Epson BT-200 Glasses

Epson did not publish any information on the focus of the BT-200 glasses, but my impression is that they are focused at about 20-30 feet away. The military HUDs I worked with when in industry were focused closer to infinity, but I read they had to be careful to not focus beyond infinity, as this could induce nausea.

It seems the focus distance of the BT-200 does not seem ideal. I do find I have to change my focus between the outside world, and the glasses. I can?t see both clearly at the same time. Not ideal, but it is MUCH easier than focusing and looking down back inside the airplane to get my data. Also, the glasses do not cause any nausea for me, or anyone that has tried them out. Maybe this is partly attributable to the focus?I don?t know.

About ten other smart glasses are currently in development, with varying features. One of them was designed for aviation, and that company was at the Paris airshow. They advertise a focus of infinity and a very wide field of view. Nothing available yet, but it is clear that this technology is developing rapidly.

Overall, my evaluation of the Epson glasses is that while they are not ideal, but they are very good, and they provide a very substantial benefit to me when I fly. Yes, I would like to see the focus be further out there (if it doesn't make me sick!), but even as they are, I love them, and for the price, I have no complaints! For me it is a huge step forward compared with panel mounted instruments, especially at times when you want your head out the window (such as landing, aerobatics, stalls, etc.)

I also find that they fit under my headseats (I have Zulus), are not to heavy or uncomfortable (but they are heavier that regular glasses), and are easy to read in full sunlight, and have minimal impact on my vision due to optical distortions, etc.

Thanks
Greg Toman
 
Thanks for the focus info Greg.
As for info to be presented, I have always thought that AoA would be great on HUD glasses, although audible beeper with variable speed on the beep rate is probably as good.
John
 
hUD

There is a cool video on Vimeo of a company named Aeroglasses using the Epson B200 as well but at this point all simulated and not actual. Congrats to GRT for bringing this Pretty impressive technology to the market.
 
olyolson said:
Greg,

Looked through the info on the website and not sure what the HUD glasses will do without any GRT Avionics. I have no GRT avionics in my -4, is this a stand alone system or do I need a GRT EFIS with Synthetic Vision?
Click to expand...

you would have to have a GRT system of some sort to feed it the airspeed/altitude/ahrs data, in his post, he's states that even a MiniX would do, so for $1200 plus the cost of of the glasses, you could have it in your setup

call it $2k all in
 
To me, this device, as shown in the Aeroglasses video, appears to increase the likelihood of a mid-air collision. The impression I have is that this will inhibit pilots from looking out the window to spot traffic that doesn't show up on the ADS-B system.

I hope that the GRT system somehow manages to avoid that trap.

Dave
 
Will these work over a pair of regular prescription glasses? Has anyone tried?

Thanks,

-Dj
 
deej said:
Will these work over a pair of regular prescription glasses? Has anyone tried?

Thanks,

-Dj
Click to expand...

mentioned in the first post- so the answer is NO, but you can buy prescription lenses that fit the Epsom glasses it seems

Glasses can be fitted with prescription lenses, and include sunglass filters for daytime flying.

edit: I see your comment below DJ, having played with these types of glasses before, i would doubt you could double them up with something underneath them- nor would you really want to, that's a lot going on
 
Last edited:
bkthomps said:
mentioned in the first post- so the answer is NO
Click to expand...

Hi Brian,
To be fair, it doesn't say anything in the first post if anyone has tried to wear these over regular prescription glasses, which is what I was asking.

From the pictures it doesn't look likely, but I was curious if anyone has tried.

-Dj
 
mv031161 said:
Found the Video! thanks to GRT we are getting closer to this reality! https://vimeo.com/101826751
Click to expand...

The video is very impressive. The idea of being able to turn your head and see restricted airspace and how it's geographically laid out along with complex airspace, aoa, AS, ALT, traffic,....all while looking outside.

Is the transparency of the projected image adjustable?
 
David Paule said:
To me, this device, as shown in the Aeroglasses video, appears to increase the likelihood of a mid-air collision. The impression I have is that this will inhibit pilots from looking out the window to spot traffic that doesn't show up on the ADS-B system.

I hope that the GRT system somehow manages to avoid that trap.

Dave
Click to expand...

Of course I haven't yet tried on the glasses. Do they inhibit views to the side more than ordinary glasses (which I wear)?
Keep in mind that the GRT offering does NOT duplicate what was shown in that video. Because there is no reference to head orientation, the GRT system does not project any images of stuff referenced to the ground - like the restricted airspace shown in the video, or a runway.
I suspect that the initial "gee-wiz" factor may in fact cause pilots to forget to look around; but that hopefully will quickly pass. I noted parts of the video showed the pilot looking to one side, then the other.
 
deej said:
Will these work over a pair of regular prescription glasses? Has anyone tried?

Thanks,

-Dj
Click to expand...

The answer is YES - I wore them over my regular glasses standing in front of the GRT booth, and was pleasantly surprised ast how well they worked. I hope to give these a try in a ckcpit sometime in teh near future, and will let folks know what I find, and how they work for me.

Paul
 
More responses to GRT HUD

The BT-200 glasses are designed to allow you to wear prescription glasses and the BT-200. At the show many people have done this, and I don't think there has been any glasses that were too wide for the BT200 to fit around.

When you wear both your own prescription glasses and the BT200, it tends to push the BT200 further out, and thus down lower on your nose. Nose pads might be necessary to bring the BT200 up higher so they are in the correct position.

As for the aerovision concept. My impression was that this was a little too idealistic for several technical reasons I won't get into. I choose a more traditional HUD view for many reasons, one of which is that it has been tested and proven (although not in a wearable HUD). I have not been disappointed with my choices, and those that have flown with it didn't make any comments critical of the basic design. Their comments (so far) have been about wanting more content to help them more. All agree it is a trade-off between clutter and content.

My opinion is that regardless of whether you have a "look-around" capability, you must first have a HUD view that you can count on. It can't be something subject to the performance of any head-tracking, etc. It must be reliable and usable.

I had two conversations with professional pilots with lots of traditional HUD experience today. They were worried about a dis-orienting effect from the HUD image not being fixed as it is in a fighter plane or 737. I tended to disagree with them, as I have experience flying with a wearable hud, including approach and landing. On the other hand, they have extensive experience in actual IFR with a HUD that I don't have. I understand their concern. I will try some simulated IFR with the wearable HUD, but this could be a difficult question to answer until we have lots of experience, and it might be something that varies from person to person.

I can say, without any uncertainty, that I can fly a more precise approach when using the glasses and following the synthetic approach that is driving the glasses from the EFIS. (I am currently doing this with a Mini-AP in my RV-6A.)

I expect that over the next few years, as this technology advances, that you will start seeing pilots fall into two groups...those who use glasses, and those that don't. I expect for those that do, the panel will serve as a user-interface to the airplane, will provide detailed data, but the glasses will be the primary flight display, and the panel will be a backup primary filght display. This is already happening with the 737 on the captains side.

Greg Toman
 
Greg_Toman said:
The BT-200 glasses are designed to allow you to wear prescription glasses and the BT-200. At the show many people have done this, and I don't think there has been any glasses that were too wide for the BT200 to fit around.
Click to expand...

This is excellent news, thank you!

Now I'm very keen to try these. :)

If one already has a bluetooth USB module in an HX talking to an Android tablet, can it also talk to the glasses at the same time?

-Dj
 
Glare shield mount?

Any chance for a glare shield mounted conventional HUD in the next year?

Or are the glasses large enough to mount on the glare shield and use them there now?
 
F1R said:
Any chance for a glare shield mounted conventional HUD in the next year?
Click to expand...

You could mount an Android tablet on the glareshield easily enough, and use the current GRT android software to display a PFD.

EDIT: Hi rmartingt, I see your comment below. I realize this isn't the same thing. I was simply offering an inexpensive alternative for a glareshield mounted PFD as a possible option. Depending on how it is mounted, the size of the tablet, and your height sitting in the seat, it doesn't have to block any of the outside view while keeping the info closer to your line of sight out the window.

-Dj
 
Last edited:
deej said:
You could mount an Android tablet on the glareshield easily enough, and use the current GRT android software to display a PFD.

-Dj
Click to expand...

That isn't the same thing. The idea is to directly overlay the symbology on the outside view, focused at infinity so you can see it while also looking at stuff out the window. All putting a tablet up high does is block forward view with a duplicated PFD that isn't overlaid on the outside view.
 
I'm new to the Van's site, but have enjoyed using the GRT data software from y'all for years. I visited Greg and bought the new mini last OSH. I was a Naval Test Pilot and Flight Surgeon and we worked for years to try and get this helmet mounted display right. The military versions were still pretty delicate and glitchy ten years ago, when I retired. The USAF actually assigned a dedicated crewman(person) to safeguard the optics and electronics. The Naval (USN/USMC) never had that kind of budget. My guess is the HMDs are still a work in progress. They tend to induce SD (Spatial Disorientation), especially in the CLAG or at night. Please fly with a safety pilot until you have some experience and I would recommend a safety course for the early adapters and enthusiasts! This is in the military displays, I'm talking about. I have not flown GRT's version, yet. It may be better if it is not "stabilized" because even the multi-million dollar systems tend to drift in spatial and temporal lags. This can also induce "sim sickness" because when the brain detects a mismatch between visual and inertial(vestibular perception) the brain-stem evacuates any recent food... (evolutionary theory suggests this was a survival tactic for 4 legged terrestrial animals who never saw such a mismatch unless poisoned or drugged.)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top