Eye Movements Data Processing for Ab Initio Military Pilot Training

  • Emilien Dubois
  • Colin Blättler
  • Cyril Camachon
  • Christophe Hurter
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 39)


French ab initio military pilots are trained to operate a new generation of aircraft equipped with glass cockpit avionics (Rafale, A400 M). However gaze scanning teachings can still be improved and remain a topic of great interest. Eye tracking devices can record trainee gaze patterns in order to compare them with correct ones. This paper presents experimentation conducted in a controlled simulation environment where trainee behaviors were analyzed with notifications given in real-time. In line with other research in civil aviation, this experimentation shows that student-pilots spend too much time looking at inboard instruments (inside the cockpit). In addition, preliminary results show that different notifications bring modifications of the visual gaze pattern. Finally we discuss future strategies to support a more efficient pilot training thanks to real-time gaze recording and its analysis.


Eye tracker Gaze behavior Military student pilots Flight simulator Automation issue 



This study is supported by the “Direction Générale de l’Armement” (DGA).


  1. 1.
    Dahlstrom, N., Dekker, S., Nahlinder, S.: Introduction of technically advanced aircraft in ab-initio flight training. In: Technical Report, (2006-02) (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lindo, R.S., Deaton, J.E., Cain, J.H., Lang, C.: Methods of instrument training and effects on pilots’ performance with different types of flight instrument displays. Aviat. Psychol. Appl. Hum. Factors 2(2), 62 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Federal Aviation Administration (1998b). Scanning for Other Aircraft. Aeronautical Information Manual, 8-1-6-c. Oklahoma City, OK: AuthorGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Colvin, K.W., Dodhia, R.M., Belcher, S.A., Dismukes, R.K.: Scanning for visual traffic: An eye tracking study. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, pp. 255–260. Dayton, OH, USA: The Wright State University (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rudisill, M.: Flight crew experience with automation technologies on commercial transport flight decks. In: Human Performance in Automated Systems: Current Research and Trends, pp. 203–211. Hillsdale, NJ (1994)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association. Air Safety Institute. The Accident Record for TAA. Frederick: AOPA Foundation. In: Institute, A.S. (n.d.). The Accident ecord of the Technically Advanced Aircraft. Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rantanen, E.M., Talleur, D.A.: Incremental transfer and cost effectiveness of groundbased flight trainers in university aviation programs. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 49(7), pp. 764–768). SAGE Publications, London (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Macchiarella, N.D., Arban, P.K., Doherty, S.M.: Transfer of training from flight training devices to flight for ab-initio pilots. Int. J. Appl. Aviat. Stud. 6(2), 299–314 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Taylor, H.L., et al.: Incremental training effectiveness of personal computer aviation training devices (PCATD) used for instrument training. In: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Aviation Research Lab (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Taylor, H.L., Talleur, D. A., Emanuel Jr, T.W., Rantanen, E.M.: Transfer of training effectiveness of a flight training device (FTD). In: Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, pp. 1–4 (2005) Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Johnson, N., Wiegmann, D., Wickens, C.: Effects of advanced cockpit displays on general aviation pilots’ decisions to continue visual flight rules flight into instrument meteorological conditions. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 50(1), pp. 30–34. Sage Publications, London (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    AOPA Air Safety Foundation. How to avoid a midair collision. 16 Jan 1993Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    FAR/AIM. Aeronautical Information Manual/ Federal Aviation Regulations. McGraw-Hill (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Eyrolle, H., Mariné, C., Mailles, S.: La simulation des environnements dynamiques: intérêts et limites. In: Cellier, J.M., De Keyser, V., Valot, C. (eds.) La gestion du temps dans les environnements dynamiques. PUF, Paris, pp. 103–121 (1996)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Buisson, M., Bustico, A., Chatty, S., Colin, F. R., Jestin, Y., Maury, S., Truillet, P.: Ivy: un bus logiciel au service du développement de prototypes de systèmes interactifs. In: Proceedings of the 14th French-speaking conference on Human-computer interaction (Conférence Francophone sur l’Interaction Homme-Machine), pp. 223–226. ACM (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kiesler, C.A.: The Psychology of Commitment: Experiments Linking Behavior to Belief. Academic Press, New York (1971)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Joule, R.V., Beauvois, J.L.: La soumission librement consentie: comment amener les gens à faire librement ce qu’ils doivent faire? Presses universitaires de France (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hurter, C., Tissoires, B., Conversy, S.: FromDaDy: Spreading data across views to support iterative exploration of aircraft trajectories. IEEE TVCG 15(6), 1017–1024 (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hurter, C., Ersoy, O., Fabrikant, S., Klein, T., Telea, A.: Bundled Visualization of Dynamic Graph and Trail Data. (TVCG) Visualization and Computer Graphics (2013)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bay, H., Ess, A., Tuytelaars, T., Van Gool, Luc: SURF: speeded up robust features. Comput. Vis. Image Underst. (CVIU) 110(3), 346–359 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stewart, J.E., Dohme, J.A., Nullmeyer, R.T.: US Army initial entry rotary-wing transfer of training research. Int. J. Aviat. Psychol. 12(4), 359–375 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wright, S., O’Hare, D.: Can a glass cockpit display help (or hinder) performance of novices in simulated flight training? Appl. Ergon. 47, 292–299 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emilien Dubois
    • 1
  • Colin Blättler
    • 2
  • Cyril Camachon
    • 2
  • Christophe Hurter
    • 1
  1. 1.ENACLaboratoire D’Informatique Interactive (LII)ToulouseFrance
  2. 2.CReAFacteurs Humains et Milieux Opérationnels (FHMO)Salon-de-ProvenceFrance

Personalised recommendations