Documents / Official release
This Defense Intelligence Reference Document, dated 1 November 2010 and numbered DIA-08-1011-002, was prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency's Defense Warning Office. It is one of a series of advanced technology reports produced under the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications program. It draws mainly on the book Frontiers of Propulsion Science and speculates about breakthroughs such as control of gravity and inertia and faster-than-light travel. It then proposes a provisional cockpit design with six-degree-of-freedom controls, virtual displays and no windows.
From the source:Release of 2026-09-18 Incident: 11/1/10, Las Vegas, Nevada. Released with redactions. This document is a Defense Intelligence Reference Document (DIRD), a technical reference format used by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) to capture baseline knowledge on a specific topic for later analytic use. DIRDs are best understood as reference and synthesis products rather than as original research. It is one of 38 DIRDs produced under the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP) between 2009 and 2011. Because AAWSAP’s scope permitted a broad range of supporting topics, not every DIRD in the series directly concerns aerospace systems or future threat assessment. The following summary reflects the DIRD’s scope and framing at the time of writing and should not be read as implying current validation of the concepts discussed. This DIRD examines how cockpit design might change if future aerospace vehicles were ever to achieve major propulsion breakthroughs such as control over gravity and inertia, “propellantless” flight, or faster-than-light travel. The report does not describe an existing or emerging vehicle class. Instead, it asks what such hypothetical capabilities would mean for piloting, displays, controls, and human factors, and it argues that the biggest design challenges would come from full six-degree-of-freedom motion, operation across multiple flight regimes from near-surface flight to orbit and deep space, and the possible separation between the craft’s actual motion and the crew’s internal physical sensations. It combines those assumptions with established human-machine-interface principles and with maturing inputs such as gesture, voice, and brain-machine control to outline a provisional cockpit centered on intuitive displays, stress-tolerant physical controls, and a virtual surround display.
UNCLASSIFIED/ ,'FOR OFFI@IAL WSE QptLY look for information rather than being proficient at remembering a sequence of steps from which to retrieve information. In systems having different operating modes, a common error is for an operator to execute a command sequence that is inappropriate for the mode they are currently using but entirely correct for a different mode. 33 This type of error is called a "mode error." An example of this is when a pilot enters a new heading for the autopilot to follow when the plane is not in autopilot mode. To prevent this error, it is advised to have the most critical operating modes as fixed, physical displays. Other Distractions It is important to remember that the cockpit might not always offer a smooth, distraction-free ride. Buffeting can cause a finger to press the wrong button (or a gesture-based command to misdirect), or the eyes might not be able to resolve a particular value. Excessive use of audible alarms and blinking lights can saturate the pilot. Other activities or distractions available to the pilot must be taken into account so that the most critical functions are easy to find and operate, including sufficiently large buttons and text. Alarms and Responses Traditionally, physical enunciator panels combined with audible alarms and blinking lights were used to highlight malfunctions. In addition to fixed enunciator panels, more complex systems can now computationally analyze a number of variables and only present the most pertinent values and alarm states. DEVICES TO CONVEY IN FORMATION Observation and interpretation of displays is always secondary to the primary task of actually operating the system. Thus, it is important that displays be designed to first serve the user and to take on as much of the information-processing burden as possible. Also, it is suggested that the displays and control input devices should be designed according to the operator's preferences, as opposed to the more common practice of designing based on the system engineer's expectations. The following paragraphs describe lessons learned regarding various methods of conveying information to the pilot. 34 Fixed and Adaptive Displays Fixed displays, such as the gauges of older aircraft, do not change the type of information they display nor do they morph their format. These can be dials, bar graphs, an artificial horizon, or simple indicator lights. Such fixed displays can be projected with computerized screens where several interrelated values can be combined into a single, computed value. Adaptive displays, on the other hand, can change their formats or change the topics displayed to fit operational situations or individuals. Both have their respective optimum uses. During the advent of adaptive displays (circa 1990s), they tended to be overused. The advantage is that the information can be tailored to minimize the volume of information displayed at any one time. The disadvantages are that such systems require more UNCLASSIFIED/fFOA: OFFICIO la Plili Oralla¥ 23
Not linked to a story yet.
Official release, from the pursue collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 57 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.