Panoramic Projection Avionics Displays

Michael H. Kalmanash*
Kaiser Electronics, a Rockwell Collins Business
2701 Orchard Parkway, San Jose, CA 95134
ABSTRACT
Avionics projection displays are entering production in advanced tactical aircraft. Early adopters of this technology in
the avionics community used projection displays to replace or upgrade earlier units incorporating direct-view CRT or
AMLCD devices. Typical motivation for these upgrades were the alleviation of performance, cost and display device
availability concerns. In these systems, the upgraded (projection) displays were one-for-one form / fit replacements for
the earlier units. As projection technology has matured, this situation has begun to evolve. The Lockheed-Martin F35 is the first program in which the cockpit has been specifically designed to take advantage of one of the more unique
capabilities of rear projection display technology, namely the ability to replace multiple small screens with a single
large conformal viewing surface in the form of a panoramic display. Other programs are expected to follow, since the
panoramic formats enable increased mission effectiveness, reduced cost and greater information transfer to the pilot.
Some of the advantages and technical challenges associated with panoramic projection displays for avionics
applications are described below.
Keywords: projection displays, avionics, flat panels, microdisplays, AMLCDs, multifunction displays, LCOS

1. INTRODUCTION
Previous talks at this Conference1,2 have outlined the avionics projection display concept and described several
development efforts in place at Kaiser Electronics. This paper and the one following it3 extend the scope of previous
work, and detail current efforts both large and small.
Projection vs. Direct View AMLCD
While AMLCD technology continues to make major performance advancements (including larger screen sizes), the
utilization of AMLCD microdisplays in rear projection systems can provide significant advantages in many avionics
settings.
The overwhelming majority of commercial off the shelf (COTS) AMLCDs, including microdisplays, are manufactured
in one of a number of standard configurations, which are largely application-dependent. These standards are
constantly evolving, and are summarized in Table 1 (which has no pretensions of completeness). Note from the table
that higher resolution AMLCDs usually are made in larger sizes, to fit their intended end-use.
Because avionics displays are required to fit into constrained volumes and are viewed from a relatively short distance,
their ideal characteristics include unique form factors and high resolution in terms of pixel density (pixels/inch).
While some AMLCD ruggedization is usually required to achieve compatibility with avionics requirements, the need
for AMLCDs with custom sizes (lacking a commercial counterpart) carries a large nonrecurring cost premium and
raises questions of availability of supply. If multiple platforms and/or high volume applications accompany this
custom size requirement, the supplier concerns can be managed effectively and costs can be amortized. If, on the other
hand, unique platform-specific size requirements are imposed on small volume programs, then undesirable
compromises must often be made.

* mhkalman@rockwellcollins.com; phone 1-408-532-4657; fax 1-408-954-1042

Cockpit Displays X, Darrel Hopper, Editor, Proceedings of SPIE

Vol. 5080 (2003) 2003 SPIE 0277-786X/03/$15.00

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 04/24/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

289

While microdisplays too are manufactured in standard configurations, the size differences between such devices are
small and, further, the key physical parameters of a projection display system (overall size, viewing area, aspect ratio)
are to a large extent independent of the specific physical parameters of the imagers used. Size scaling of the projected
image is straightforward, and even aspect ratio can be tailored by simply masking unwanted microdisplay pixels.
This decoupling of system parameters and component parameters extends as well to other electro-optical elements of
the projection system (including lamps, prisms, filters, etc) and gives projection display designers the proven ability to
use common components and subassemblies across multiple platforms, in display units with quite different
characteristics. This commonality enables reduced costs and shorter development schedules. It also permits the use of
COTS components to a much larger extent than in direct view display systems, relying on the display system
integrator to manage the aircraft environments. This capability provides further cost savings and helps ensure
continued availability despite technology evolution.

Direct View AMLCD

Resolution
VGA

640 x 480

Microdisplay

Application

Diagonal

Application

Diagonal

appliances

10.4" - 20"

near eye

0.4"
0.4" - 0.5"

SVGA

800 x 600

appliances

10.4" - 13.6"

near eye
compact projectors

XGA

1024 x 768

notebooks
monitors

14.1"

projectors

0.5" - 1.0"

WXGA

1280 x 768

wide screen TV

17" - 26"

rear projection TV
(RPTV)

0.5" - 0.8"

SXGA

1280 x 1024

notebooks
monitors

15" - 19"

SXGA+

1400 x 1050

notebooks
monitors

14.1" - 16"

UXGA

1600 x 1200

monitors
workstations

15" - 22"

WUXGA

1920 x 1200

HDTV

24"

QXGA

2048 x 1536

QSXGA

2560 x 2048

workstations

projectors
monitors
RPTV
projectors
monitors
RPTV

0.9" - 1.3"

0.7" - 1.1"

HDTV

0.7" - 0.8"

cinema

0.9" - 1.3"

20"

Table 1. COTS AMLCDs are manufactured in standard configurations

Finally, projection offers performance advantages compared to direct view AMLCDs, including higher resolution and
contrast, and the elimination of viewing angle artifacts. These differences are narrowing as AMLCDs improve, but
the versatility inherent in projection display technology permits such systems to be well-tailored to the requirements of
specific programs.
Projection Technology Status
A discussion of some current avionics projection display programs at Kaiser can illustrate the status of this technology.
Faced with AMLCD panel availability and cost concerns, both Lockheed Martin and Boeing turned to rear projection
technology to reconfigure the Primary Multifunction Display (PMFD) on the F-22 and the Multipurpose Color Display

290

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 5080

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 04/24/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

(MPCD) on the F/A-18E/F, respectively. Development efforts for both programs units were undertaken nearly
concurrently, beginning in 1999. The upgraded F-22 unit was denoted the projection PMFD (PPMFD), while the
F/A-18E/F MPCD replacement, which included broader modifications, was dubbed the Digitally Expandable Color
Display (DECD). The timing of these programs permitted a common projection engine to be designed for both units,
significantly reducing nonrecurring costs and promising production cost reductions through increased volumes. It
should be noted that this commonality was undertaken with the cooperation of both the US Air Force and the US Navy
(the ultimate customers), and the active participation of both Lockheed Martin and Boeing (the prime contractors of
the two aircraft involved).
The design of both the PPMFD and the DECD is now complete. The F/A-18E/F DECD completed formal
qualification late last year and is now in production. First flight of the PPMFD was in December 2002, and
qualification is planned for later in 2003. The implementation of these two display units has demonstrated the
versatility of the approach since both the viewing area and the overall form factor of the PPMFD and the DECD are
dramatically different, as shown in Figure 1.

F-22

F/A-18E/F

PPMFD

DECD

F-22
Nomenclature
Technology
Reason for upgrade

Predecessor
PMFD

Upgrade
PPMFD

AMLCD

Projection

AMLCD availability

F/A-18E/F
Predecessor
Upgrade
MPCD
DECD
AMCD

Projection

AMLCD availability, cost

View area

7.8x7.8

7.8x7.8

6x6

6x6

Resolution

640x640

750x750

512x512

750x750

OIS -> ??!

Aurora

OIS ->dpiX -> ??!

Aurora

Imager Source
Form-fit allowances
Commonality between
programs

none
none

lamp, imagers,
projection engine

none
none

lamp, imagers,
projection engine

Figure 1. Projection Displays have replaced AMLCDs in the F-22 and F/A-18E/F Aircraft

In contrast to these retrofit programs, which use multiple displays in the cockpit (six in the F-22, four in the F/A18E/F), the Lockheed Martin F-35 aircraft the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) was conceived from the outset to
Proc. of SPIE Vol. 5080

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 04/24/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

291

incorporate a panoramic display surface, covering virtually the entire instrument panel area. The implementation of
this concept is exceptionally well-suited to rear projection technology, and the Multifunction Display System (MFDS)
is now under development for this aircraft, as illustrated in Figure 2. The MFDS includes an integral touchscreen
replacing the standard pushbutton bezels, and offers the largest possible viewing surface area as well as very high
resolution. It promises to become a precursor of programs to follow.

Figure 2. Panoramic Multifunction Display System (MFDS) for the Joint Strike Fighter

2. AVIONICS PROJECTION TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW

Figure 3 illustrates the fundamental optical architecture of a rear projection display system. The Projection Engine
consists of five optical modules, as shown. The Lamp Module provides the system illumination. Its emission is
typically white light generated by a short arc lamp, though solid state illumination techniques are under consideration
The light output is optically coupled via the Illumination Module to the Image Engine, which contains the
microdisplay imagers and color separation / color combination optics. The Image Engine output is coupled via
Projection Optics assembly to a high contrast Screen Assembly.

video

PERSONALITY
MODULE

IMAGE
ENGINE

ILLUMINATION
MODULE

power /
I/O

BALLAST /
POWER SUPPLY
MODULE

LAMP
ASSEMBLY

PROJECTION
OPTICS

SCREEN
ASSEMBLY

PROJECTION
ENGINE

Optical modules are shown in white

Electronic modules are shaded

Figure 3. Modular projection system architecture permits tailoring to meet program needs

The Illumination Module shapes the beam to match the usable microdisplay form factor and homogenizes it for
improved luminance uniformity. The module also polarizes the lamp output, usually in a highly efficient manner that
recirculates the unwanted polarization rather than simply absorbing it, enhancing the overall display luminance with
no increase in power dissipation. For avionics projection systems, the illumination module also contains the wide
dynamic range electro-optical dimmer needed to accommodate day and night use.
The Image Engine creates the actual image to be displayed on the screen. Current avionics projection systems employ
three primary color channels (red, green, blue), each of which utilizes a separate microdisplay. The monochrome sub292

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 5080

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 04/24/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

images created by the three microdisplays are combined in the Image Engine into a high resolution full color image,
which is magnified by the Projection Optics and relayed to the Screen. To maintain high image quality, the Image
Engine is environmentally sealed after assembly, protecting it from moisture, dust and contamination. New integrated
color management systems and lamp technology permits much smaller projection engines from those used in the F/A18E/F and F-22 systems. The differences are illustrated in Figure 4.

CORE F-22 & F/A-18E/F Projection

Engine

Advanced Projection
Engine

Figure 4. Technology evolution permits size reduction and packaging simplification

High resolution COTS reflective liquid crystal on silicon (LCOS) microdisplay imagers, available from many sources,
are used in Kaiser projection units, though DMDs (digital micromirror devices) or transmissive LCD microdisplays
are obvious alternative choices. LCOS microdisplays are AMLCDs where the active matrix is a standard silicon
integrated circuit (IC), created on a silicon wafer in a conventional foundry. The pixels are highly reflective
aluminum mirrors deposited as the last metallization step in the IC fabrication process. Since the pixel mirrors are
deposited on top of the addressing circuitry, these devices can combine small size and high resolution while
maintaining a high fill factor and high efficiency.
Non-standard form factors or resolution requirements are quite easy to accommodate in projection display systems
using standard parts, since unused microdisplay pixels are simply masked off. This eliminates the need for custom
imagers, matched to specific program needs. The LCOS devices for the F-22 and F/A-18E/F Core Projection Engine
are XGA parts (1024x768 pixels), of which a square array of 750x750 pixels is used. For the JSF panoramic
projector, two sets of SXGA devices are used (1280x1024 pixels). This is described more fully below.
The screen is a critical part of avionics projection displays. A unique high-resolution COTS-based screen support
sunlight readability with a combination of high transmittance and very low reflectance. High luminance is maintained
over a broad viewing cone, with no color or grayscale dependence on viewing angle. Excellent display contrast is
maintained, independent of viewing angle, and high ambient contrast exceeds 8:1.

3. WHY PANORAMIC DISPLAYS?

Panoramic big picture displays have long been sought after in the avionics community4, but their practical
implementation was for many years delayed by technology issues. Wide screen CRTs would be unacceptably bulky
and heavy, while large area direct-view AMLCDs were, until recently, beyond the limits of TFT manufacturing.
Similarly, early attempts at developing avionics projection displays were hampered by the lack of a commercial
infrastructure for high resolution projectors, requiring custom components and raising issues of life, cost and

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 5080

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 04/24/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

293

availability of key components. These limitations have now been largely removed. Large AMLCDs are starting to
become available, and high performance electronic projection displays are in broad usage.
Panoramic displays are of great interest in the avionics community because of their innate ability to improve pilot
situational awareness by virtue of their large, reconfigurable viewing surface. For tactical aircraft, the pilot is able to
view the entire threat area at one time and additionally is able to easily view and manage detailed imagery from offboard sources, including UAVs, AWACS, ground vehicles and other piloted aircraft.
It is envisioned that lead tactical fighter/attack aircraft with high resolution, panoramic cockpit displays will act as the
decision makers in network-centric warfare. The pilots will receive target information from their command post and
assess which vehicle is best positioned to take out the target such as a UAV, ground vehicle, or other aircraft. The
pilot can compare the video imagery from the selected attack vehicle with satellite information depicting the target.
The panoramic display can be configured to maximize the large video windows in order to confirm that the target is in
fact the correct target. Once this is confirmed, the pilot can direct the attack vehicle to take the target out. The pilot
will have the ability to perform real-time decision making for many other aircraft and vehicles that do not have the
ability to clearly confirm target designation due to smaller, lower resolution displays, or the inability to access offboard data. This capability will significantly reduce the time from target identification to target removal.
In commercial transports as well as tactical aircraft, a fundamental benefit of the panoramic cockpit is the ability to
present fused and overlaid data in a legible manner due to the large format and high resolution offered. This is
illustrated in Figure 5. In upgraded aircraft, existing display formats can be soft-mapped to the panoramic surface,
with additional functionality enabled by advanced processing and graphics. Excellent pilot vehicle interfaces can be
maintained by touchscreen-enabled soft pushbuttons, as are being implemented currently on the JSF. The touchscreen
also enables pilot-selectable window allocation and scaling.

Figure 5. Panoramic displays enable the legible presentation of fused and overlaid data

The replacement of two or more discrete display units by a single panoramic display holds the promise of reducing
costs via such expedients as a single chassis, single power source, fewer circuit cards, fewer connectors, etc. For
projection displays in particular, this benefit is augmented by the significant re-use of subassemblies from previous
programs. Further the cost per square inch of display surface is reduced because of the elimination of unneeded
mullions and bezels. Reliability is also greatly improved in projection panoramic displays since critical components
such as imagers are packaged within the overall display unit and can thus be protected from harsh environments.
Reliability is further enhanced by the ability to selectively apply redundancy to back up key subassemblies and avoid
single point failures.
Panoramic projection displays, in particular, can lead to significant power and weight reductions. The optical engine
and electronic subassemblies are largely independent of screen area, permitting the viewing area to be increased with
almost no weight penalty. Power savings are inherent in the fact that the image is formed within the projector,
independent of viewing angle. Light utilization is maximized by the collection optics, and the use of high efficiency
dichroic elements instead of absorptive color filters further increase efficiency. These factors are discussed more fully
below.
294

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 5080

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 04/24/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

4. TECHNICAL ISSUES AND TRADES

Resolution
To maximize their usefulness, panoramic displays must be able to offer resolution matched to the on-board processors
and sensors, up to the limits of the human observer. Assuming that the limiting resolution of the human eye is 1
minute of arc, the maximum usable resolution (pixel density) of a cockpit display is about 120 pixels / inch (at a
nominal viewing distance of about 28 inches. Projection panoramic displays using LCOS imagers are readily able to
provide this resolution. The JSF MFDS, for example, uses a dual-SXGA engine architecture with an 8-inch by 20inch screen, yielding a pixel density of 128 pixels / inch. Similarly, a 16 x 9 inch panoramic display would be able to
provide a resolution of 120 pixels / inch using a single projection engine with WUXGA imagers (1920x1200). Some
of the trades associated with single- vs. dual-engine projectors are discussed below, but since the current upper limit
for COTS LCOS imagers is 2048x1536, in practical terms resolution in cockpit applications is virtually unlimited.
Image Quality
Direct view AMLCDs exhibit a well-known dependence on observer position with respect to the screen, particularly
with respect to grayscale spacing. This dependence has been reduced as the relevant technology has improved, but
could still be a concern for large direct view displays, especially in terms of uniformity of image quality over the full
surface. No such problem exists for projection displays, since the angular illumination of the microdisplay imagers is
fixed by the illumination optics, independent of viewer position. The gain of the screen can be used to concentrate the
display luminance within the desired cone of view, but this is a design variable that can be readily adjusted. Projection
displays are well-suited to large screen venues.
Packaging
Size and bulk of large format avionics display units are legitimate concerns, particularly in terms of installation and
maintainability. For projection displays in particular, depth increases as the screen diagonal is made larger, and space
behind the instrument panel is typically at a premium. Mitigating this is the fact that most of this depth consists of air,
and is driven by the throw distance between the projection optics and the screen. Both the projection and the
illumination optics can be folded to reduce depth if necessary, but further options are available.
Unlike typical avionics displays, which are self-contained in Line Replaceable Units (LRUs), panoramic projection
displays can be partitioned as shown in Figure 6, where the electro-optic assemblies are contained in a Line
Replaceable Module (LRM), packaged separately from the screen. The LRM is relatively compact, easing installation
and maintainability concerns, and its size is generally independent of the overall screen size.

Figure 6. Conceptual Panoramic Display Partitioning

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 5080

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 04/24/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

295

Power
Projection technology offers the promise of significant reductions in display power compared to direct view AMLCDs.
Arc lamps are the illuminator of choice for projectors, while fluorescent backlights illuminate most direct view
AMLCDs. Assuming that the luminous efficacy of these two sources are similar (ratio of light output to electrical
power in), at about 60 70 lumens/watt, in a direct-view AMLCD only about 4% of this light is utilized. Major losses
are associated with the AMLCD pixel aperture ratio (~60%), color filter transmittance (~30%) and polarizer
transmittance (~30%), while other losses are in the backlight reflector / diffuser assembly. The net efficiency is thus
less than 3 lumens / watt (~ 4% of 70 Lm/w).
In contrast, the pixel aperture ratio of LCOS devices is greater than 90%, as is the transmittance of the color
management elements in a typical projection display. There are other losses unique to projection technology,
particularly those associated with light gathering efficiency, but COTS LCOS projectors regularly demonstrate overall
efficiencies in the range of 6 7 lumens/watt. Therefore expectations are that advanced panoramic projection displays
can operate at significantly lower power levels than direct view AMLCDs.
Reliability
Reliability is a key parameter for any avionics system, but when many functions are being concentrated into a single
panoramic display system, concerns about single point failures must be addressed. With multiple screens available to
the pilot, failures can be handled by shifting data to another display surface, but what to do when there is one (or a
reduced number of) screens? This question can be handled in a variety of ways. The first dichotomy is whether the
panoramic image should be provided by a single projection engine or by two or more separate engines (with the
resulting image being tiled). These concepts are illustrated in Figure 8.
Figure 7a depicts a system similar to that of the JSF MFDS. That 20 x 8 inch panoramic display is comprised of two
tiles, each associated with a discrete SXGA projection engine. This provides a total resolution of 2560 x 1024 full
color pixels (over 120 pixels/inch), and offers virtually 100% redundancy. With a failure of either engine, critical data
can be automatically displayed on the other side. Figure 7b, on the other hand, represents a variety of alternative
approaches. Here a single projection engine is used to generate the entire panoramic image, with redundancy in some
or all of the subassemblies as shown.
Total lamp failure, for example, would render the display virtually worthless, so a reasonable starting place would be
redundant lamps. COTS projectors with dual lamps have been sold for some time, but for avionics use we have
developed proprietary solid state architectures to provide redundancy via a backup capability. Two lamps are provided
but only one is driven. In the event of a sensed failure of that lamp, the second lamp is automatically selected. The
two lamps are identical and each provides performance essentially the same as for a single lamp system. In an
alternative configuration, the lamp functionality could be divided into day and night use, or the lamps could be
alternately selected each time the display is powered up. This latter approach would effectively double the lamp
lifetime. Since measured lifetimes of short arc lamps are approaching 10,000 hours or more, a two-lamp configuration
would go a long way to eliminating lamp life from consideration as a failure mechanism.
Redundancy could also be applied to lamp power supplies (ballasts), and even to microdisplays. Configurations have
been developed where two sets of microdisplays were incorporated within the same image engine. Though the
likelihood of LCOS failure is small, the costs for this are relatively minor since LCOS microdisplay prices are a
fraction of the cost of direct view AMLCDs. Finally, as shown, the entire projection engine before the projection
optics could be replicated. A failure anywhere in the imaging would trigger selection of the alternate engine to
project its image onto the screen.

296

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 5080

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 04/24/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

Projection
LRM

Projection
LRM

(a) Fully Redundant Projection Tiles

Redundant
Imagers
Image
Engine

Redundant
Lamp

Projection
Optics

llumination
Module

Screen
Assembly

Redundant
Engine / Lamp

Lamp
Assembly
(b) Redundant Subassemblies (Shaded)

Figure 7. Redundancy concepts avoid single point failures

The projection screen is one of the few components for which redundancy would be difficult to implement, but on the
other hand a screen with a hole in it produces a projection display with a hole in it, hardly a catastrophic event in and
of itself.

5. CONCLUSIONS
Panoramic display technology holds the promise of revolutionizing cockpit design. Whether as part of an upgrade to
legacy aircraft (Figure 8) or in new platforms, large area and conformal displays will enable faster, more accurate
information transfer to the pilot Rear projection technology ensures that these changes are accompanied by higher
reliability, better performance and lower life cycle costs.

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 5080

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 04/24/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

297

Figure 8. Panoramic projection displays can revitalize current cockpits

REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.

298

M. Kalmanash & R. Tompkins, Projection display technology for avionics applications, Proc. of SPIE 4022, pp.
63-72, Orlando, FL, April 2000.
M. Kalmanash, Status of development of LCOS projection displays for F-22A, F/A-18E/F and JSF cockpits,
Proc. of SPIE 4362, pp. 161-169, Orlando, FL, April 2001.
V. Sethna, M. Kalmanash, L. Giroir, S. Kramm, Compact projection displays for upgrading CRT and AMLCD
systems, Proc. of SPIE 5080, Orlando, FL, April 2003.
E.C. Adam, Head-Up Displays vs. Helmet-Mounted Displays: The Issues, SID International Symposium Digest
XXIV, pp. 429-432, Seattle, WA, May 1993.

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 5080

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 04/24/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms