Heads-Up Display announced by GRT Avionics

[Bavafa]

Originally Posted by Mike S

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.

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.

[deej]

Originally Posted by Greg_Toman

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

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

[Canadian_JOY]

Originally Posted by deej

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

Correct?

-Dj

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.

[David Paule]

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

[Greg_Toman]

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

[Greg_Toman]

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

[Greg_Toman]

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

[rjtjrt]

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

[mv031161]

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.

[bkthomps]

Originally Posted by olyolson

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?

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