Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Received: from [161.88.255.139] (account marv@lancaironline.net)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.2.2)
  with HTTP id 425573 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 12:00:09 -0400
From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] HUDS
To: lml
X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser Interface v.4.2.2
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 12:00:09 -0400
Message-ID: <web-425573@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <MMEELOPNFCJLIMPNNKMOIEOLDEAA.matt.hapgood@alumni.duke.edu>
References: <MMEELOPNFCJLIMPNNKMOIEOLDEAA.matt.hapgood@alumni.duke.edu>
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for "Matt Hapgood" <matt.hapgood@alumni.duke.edu>:

  HUD would be most attractive in instrument conditions, particularly on
  approach.  That is the only instance in which I would be willing to "pay"
  for the product.  Air traffic is least appealing... if it's that close to me
  in VFR I should see it.  If I already have Mode S then something will be
  barking at me, and if I am in instruments I a) will be DEPENDING on ATC for
  separation and b) wouldn't want to busy up the view with other aircraft on
  final or in the pattern...
  
  M