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.
“Mission Control”3 pages
UNCLASSIFIED/ ,'FOR OFFI@IAI:: WSE ONl::Y DEVICES FOR RECEIVING PILOT COMMANDS In much the same way that displays are configured to match the dominant norms of human behavior, so too are the command functions. As evidenced by the gaming industry, the motions of the pilot's hands-whether by a joystick or a Wii controller42 - mimic the intended physical motions of the object under control. Some of these control technologies are described below. Physical Controls Devices such as joysticks, toggle switches, thumb wheels, rotary switches, and even keyboards will still be mandatory in cockpits of the future. This is based on needing fixed locations for the most critical displays and controls. Additionally, tactile feedback helps the pilot know that their command has been entered. In moments of crisis, a human can react quickly to reach for just the right switch and detect the sensation when that switch is flipped. Joysticks take advantage of human nature, where hand motions mimic the intended motions of the object under control. Joysticks and pedals with force-feedback or vibration feedback add another element of information that humans can process in parallel-feedback that would not be possible with virtual controls .43 Despite advances in other data-input technologies (e.g., voice), it is likely that there will be times when a keyboard is required, but its routine use is not expected. Keyboards are an efficient way to accurately enter alphanumeric data and especially narrative text. Conversely, keyboard use is time consuming, physically requires a large space (can be stowed, however), and is subject to errors during vibration or buffeting. Such errors are reduced when having some physical support to help anchor the hands. Gesture-Based Inputs By the time that propulsion breakthroughs become viable, it is likely that gesture-based commands will have evolved past the current systems' problems of misinterpreting wayward motions and will have become an effective way to replace the mouse for cursor control. In addition, it is expected that more options will be available through gestures than through existing mouse buttons (right click, left click, and scrolling). 44 When used in combination with a voice-command system, it is expected to be an effective tool for the more complex and varied instruction sets, such as navigation. For example, the notion of being able to point to a locati on on an expansive virtual map and say, "go there," seems an ideal implementation. Furthermore, the use of gesture-based inputs in analyzing new data seems appropriate, provided that the lessons from adaptive displays are heeded. Although fascinating, gesture-based commands are dependent on how well the information that they are manipulating is organized. Therefore, these inputs might be prone to the same keyhole errors and mode errors of adaptive displays. Prior lessons regarding quick emergency commands should also be heeded, specifically where all critical commands have dedicated physical controls. Gesture-based commands can be redund ant, but again, the physical control should be the dominant source of critical inputs . Consider the event of buffeting, where the position of an UNCLASSIFIED/fFOA. OFFICIO ls. Plili ONls.¥ 27
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.