The effect of a visual/motion display mismatch in a single axis compensatory tracking task

The frequency response of visual systems is typically unity from 0 to 20 rad/sec, while that of motion systems typically falls off in the vicinity of 6 rad/sec. The question arises as to what effect, if any, such a difference in servomechanism performance has on the simulation. Is pilot performance reduced by the conflict between displays? Would a more realistic simulation occur if the visual servomechanisms were degraded to match the motion servomechanisms? Does the pilot need and use the higher frequency information present in the visual display? The purpose of the experiment is to take a step forward toward answering these questions. Work already in the literature which bears on these questions is outlined. A description is then given of an experiment used to check for the effects of a difference in the performance of the visual and motion servomechanisms (the experiment uses a single-axis, compensatory, roll-tracking task). The results of the experiment are then presented and analyzed

Visual/motion cue mismatch in a coordinated roll maneuver

The effects of bandwidth differences between visual and motion cueing systems on pilot performance for a coordinated roll task were investigated. Visual and motion cue configurations which were acceptable and the effects of reduced motion cue scaling on pilot performance were studied to determine the scale reduction threshold for which pilot performance was significantly different from full scale pilot performance. It is concluded that: (1) the presence or absence of high frequency error information in the visual and/or motion display systems significantly affects pilot performance; and (2) the attenuation of motion scaling while maintaining other display dynamic characteristics constant, affects pilot performance

Cancer risks from arsenic in drinking water.

Ingestion of arsenic, both from water supplies and medicinal preparations, is known to cause skin cancer. The evidence assessed here indicates that arsenic can also cause liver, lung, kidney, and bladder cancer and that the population cancer risks due to arsenic in U.S. water supplies may be comparable to those from environmental tobacco smoke and radon in homes. Large population studies in an area of Taiwan with high arsenic levels in well water (170-800 micrograms/L) were used to establish dose-response relationships between cancer risks and the concentration of inorganic arsenic naturally present in water supplies. It was estimated that at the current EPA standard of 50 micrograms/L, the lifetime risk of dying from cancer of the liver, lung, kidney, or bladder from drinking 1 L/day of water could be as high as 13 per 1000 persons. It has been estimated that more than 350,000 people in the United States may be supplied with water containing more than 50 micrograms/L arsenic, and more than 2.5 million people may be supplied with water with levels above 25 micrograms/L. For average arsenic levels and water consumption patterns in the United States, the risk estimate was around 1/1000. Although further research is needed to validate these findings, measures to reduce arsenic levels in water supplies should be considered