HealthyNCT07129876
Motion Fidelity Effects With Mixed-Reality
A study testing Simulator Motion in people with Healthy, run by National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The purpose of this research is to investigate how different levels of simulator motion fidelity affect pilot performance in two different flight tasks while using a head mounted display (or mixed-reality headset) for out-the-window (OTW) visuals. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy
- What is being tested?
- Simulator Motion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 13 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 19 May 2025to 30 May 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Normal or corrected to normal vision.
Who cannot join
- Claustrophobia.
- Susceptible to motion sickness.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
NASA Ames Research Center, Vertical Motion Simulator
Mountain View, California, 94035
About this study
Official title: Effects of Simulator Motion Fidelity on Pilot Performance While Using a Mixed-Reality Headset
The purpose of this research is to investigate how different levels of simulator motion fidelity affect pilot performance in two different flight tasks while using a head mounted display (or mixed-reality headset) for out-the-window (OTW) visuals. Three levels of motion fidelity will be studied: 1) no motion, 2) small hexapod motion, and 3) one-to-one vehicle motion.
Read the detailed description
The aim of this study is to determine the effects of simulator motion fidelity on pilot performance in two demanding piloting tasks while wearing a mixed-reality headset for OTW visuals. Pilots will be exposed to mixed-reality visuals meaning that the virtual OTW visual scene will be overlayed on an image of the real simulator cockpit and head down displays (HDD). Pilots will fly two tasks in this experiment: 1) a roll-lateral sidestep maneuver, and 2) a precision landing.
In task 1, the roll-lateral sidestep maneuver will be from one landing pad to a second landing pad of a vertiport on the Fifth \& Mission Parking Garage in San Francisco. The vertiport is in a San Francisco visual database surrounded by buildings with high-resolution textures. Pilots are instructed to stay at a constant altitude. A positioning sight will be placed in the visual scene at each landing pad to allow pilots to determine their positioning error precisely. Pilots will be provided with lateral position and time criteria for desired and adequate performance. Pilots will be instructed to press an event marker on their control inceptor when they acquire the station-keeping point at the landing pad. Turbulence will be used to make the task more difficult. This task will be similar to the roll-lateral experiment described by Schroeder that was also performed in the VMS.
In task 2, pilots will perform a landing at the same vertiport in San Francisco that is used in task 1. The task will start from level flight from a position that allows for a standard approach and landing. Landing position and time criteria for desired and adequate performance will be communicated to the pilots. Pilots will press an event marker on the control inceptor when they acquire the desired reference point on the landing pad. Turbulence will be introduced to make the task more difficult.
Pilots will receive the informed consent form and a Motion Sickness Susceptibility Questionnaire (MSSQ via email first. They will be asked to fill out the MSSQ at home and return it to the PI before being scheduled and coming to the VMS. On the day of the experiment, participants will first receive a briefing and walkaround of the facility before providing their informed consent (60 minutes). Next, they will take a seat in the simulator cab where seat and headset adjustments will be made first to make sure the experiment can be performed comfortably. This is followed by the first data-collection session in which one of the tasks is flown (45 minutes). Both tasks will be flown under three motion fidelity conditions described in Section 8.3 below. Three repetitions of each motion condition will be flown for both tasks, after completing three training runs, for a total of 12 runs per task. A 30-minute break is scheduled after the first data-collection session. The second session in which the other tasks is flown will commence after the break (45 minutes). Finally, pilots will be debriefed and can ask any remaining questions (30 minutes).
Pilot performance in each task will be determined by several outcome-based variables, including the error between desired and actual aircraft position and attitude at specified locations, the intensity of control inputs, and task completion time. Pilots will also complete a motion fidelity rating and a Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ) at the end of each run.
Hypothesis: Pilot performance and subjective motion ratings will be significantly different between the different simulator motion fidelity conditions.
Before data analysis, all data will be averaged over the three repetitions of each condition. A one-way repeated-measures Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) will be used on the data from each task to determine statistically significant effects. If test assumptions are not met (e.g., homogeneity of covariance matrices), corrections or appropriate alternate tests will be used. Any reporting of the statistical results will include the F statistic (or equivalent for alternate tests), degrees of freedom, probability values, and effect sizes.
Based on previous studies investigating the effects of motion fidelity on pilot performance, it is expected that pilot performance will be lower without simulator motion or with small-hexapod motion compared to one-to-one vehicle motion. Control intensity will show the opposite trend; that is, will be higher without simulator motion and will decrease with higher motion fidelity.
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Being tested
- Simulator Motion
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Simulator MotionOther
Motion fidelity of the simulator.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Simulator Motion Variations | Experimental | 2 flight tasks; 4 motion conditions; 3 repetitions per condition (n = 12 per task) Receives: Other: Simulator Motion |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Time to Complete Flight Task Maneuver (Averaged over Repetitions)
Time needed to complete (a portion of) the flight task measured against desired and adequate performance criteria:
Heliport Approach Task - Battery time remaining (desired >=20:00 min, adequate >=19:40 min)
Lateral Reposition and Hold Task
- Reposition completion time (desired <=25 s, adequate <=35 s)
Measured: Day 1
Accuracy of the Flight Task Maneuver (Averaged over Repetitions)
Accuracy of the maneuver during (a portion of) the flight task measured against desired and adequate performance criteria:
Heliport Approach Task
- Glideslope deviation (desired +-0.7 deg, adequate +-2.1 deg)
- Localizer deviation (desired +-0.7 deg, adequate +-2.1 deg)
- Helipad boundary crossing height (desired +-10 ft, adequate +-20 ft)
- Helipad boundary crossing speed (desired +-5 kts, adequate +-10 kts)
- Helipad center deviation (desired +-20 ft, adequate +-60 ft)
Lateral Reposition and Hold Task
- Ground track deviation (desired +-5 ft, adequate +-10 ft)
- Target ground speed deviation (desired +-5 kts, adequate +-8 kts)
- Altitude deviation (desired +-5 ft, adequate +-10 ft)
- Heading deviation (desired +-10 deg, adequate +-15 deg)
- Hover point lateral and longitudinal deviation (desired +-5 ft, adequate +-10 ft)
Measured: Day 1
Motion Fidelity Rating
Possible answers are: Low Fidelity, Medium Fidelity, High Fidelity
Measured: Day 1
Secondary outcomes (1)
Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ)
This questionnaire requires rating 16 symptoms with a scale from none, slight, moderate, to severe. The symptoms are: general discomfort, fatigue, headache, eye strain, difficulty focusing, increased salivation, sweating, nausea, difficulty concentrating, fullness of head, blurred vision, dizzy (eyes open), dizzy (eyes closed), vertigo, stomach awareness, burping.
Measured: Day 1
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted19 Aug 2025
- Study start19 May 2025
- Primary completion30 May 2025
- Study completion30 May 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for HealthyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 13 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
- Sponsor type
- US federal agency
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07129876
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- STUDY00000883
- Status last verified
- Apr 2026
- First submitted
- 5 Jun 2025
- Last updated
- 13 Apr 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Apr 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effects of Simulator Motion Fidelity on Pilot Performance While Using a Mixed-Reality Headset
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07129876
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- STUDY00000883
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 13 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)US federal agency
- Study start
- 19 May 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 May 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 May 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 19 Aug 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this research is to investigate how different levels of simulator motion fidelity affect pilot performance in two different flight tasks while using a head mounted display (or mixed-reality headset) for out-the-window (OTW) visuals. Three levels of motion fidelity will be studied: 1) no motion, 2) small hexapod motion, and 3) one-to-one vehicle motion.
Detailed description
The aim of this study is to determine the effects of simulator motion fidelity on pilot performance in two demanding piloting tasks while wearing a mixed-reality headset for OTW visuals. Pilots will be exposed to mixed-reality visuals meaning that the virtual OTW visual scene will be overlayed on an image of the real simulator cockpit and head down displays (HDD). Pilots will fly two tasks in this experiment: 1) a roll-lateral sidestep maneuver, and 2) a precision landing.
In task 1, the roll-lateral sidestep maneuver will be from one landing pad to a second landing pad of a vertiport on the Fifth \& Mission Parking Garage in San Francisco. The vertiport is in a San Francisco visual database surrounded by buildings with high-resolution textures. Pilots are instructed to stay at a constant altitude. A positioning sight will be placed in the visual scene at each landing pad to allow pilots to determine their positioning error precisely. Pilots will be provided with lateral position and time criteria for desired and adequate performance. Pilots will be instructed to press an event marker on their control inceptor when they acquire the station-keeping point at the landing pad. Turbulence will be used to make the task more difficult. This task will be similar to the roll-lateral experiment described by Schroeder that was also performed in the VMS.
In task 2, pilots will perform a landing at the same vertiport in San Francisco that is used in task 1. The task will start from level flight from a position that allows for a standard approach and landing. Landing position and time criteria for desired and adequate performance will be communicated to the pilots. Pilots will press an event marker on the control inceptor when they acquire the desired reference point on the landing pad. Turbulence will be introduced to make the task more difficult.
Pilots will receive the informed consent form and a Motion Sickness Susceptibility Questionnaire (MSSQ via email first. They will be asked to fill out the MSSQ at home and return it to the PI before being scheduled and coming to the VMS. On the day of the experiment, participants will first receive a briefing and walkaround of the facility before providing their informed consent (60 minutes). Next, they will take a seat in the simulator cab where seat and headset adjustments will be made first to make sure the experiment can be performed comfortably. This is followed by the first data-collection session in which one of the tasks is flown (45 minutes). Both tasks will be flown under three motion fidelity conditions described in Section 8.3 below. Three repetitions of each motion condition will be flown for both tasks, after completing three training runs, for a total of 12 runs per task. A 30-minute break is scheduled after the first data-collection session. The second session in which the other tasks is flown will commence after the break (45 minutes). Finally, pilots will be debriefed and can ask any remaining questions (30 minutes).
Pilot performance in each task will be determined by several outcome-based variables, including the error between desired and actual aircraft position and attitude at specified locations, the intensity of control inputs, and task completion time. Pilots will also complete a motion fidelity rating and a Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ) at the end of each run.
Hypothesis: Pilot performance and subjective motion ratings will be significantly different between the different simulator motion fidelity conditions.
Before data analysis, all data will be averaged over the three repetitions of each condition. A one-way repeated-measures Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) will be used on the data from each task to determine statistically significant effects. If test assumptions are not met (e.g., homogeneity of covariance matrices), corrections or appropriate alternate tests will be used. Any reporting of the statistical results will include the F statistic (or equivalent for alternate tests), degrees of freedom, probability values, and effect sizes.
Based on previous studies investigating the effects of motion fidelity on pilot performance, it is expected that pilot performance will be lower without simulator motion or with small-hexapod motion compared to one-to-one vehicle motion. Control intensity will show the opposite trend; that is, will be higher without simulator motion and will decrease with higher motion fidelity.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Simulator Motion Variations | Experimental | Other: Simulator Motion2 flight tasks; 4 motion conditions; 3 repetitions per condition (n = 12 per task) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Normal or corrected to normal vision.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Claustrophobia.
- Susceptible to motion sickness.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Simulator MotionMotion fidelity of the simulator. | Other | Simulator Motion Variations |
Primary outcome
Time to Complete Flight Task Maneuver (Averaged over Repetitions)
Time frame: Day 1
Time needed to complete (a portion of) the flight task measured against desired and adequate performance criteria: Heliport Approach Task - Battery time remaining (desired >=20:00 min, adequate >=19:40 min) Lateral Reposition and Hold Task - Reposition completion time (desired <=25 s, adequate <=35 s)
Accuracy of the Flight Task Maneuver (Averaged over Repetitions)
Time frame: Day 1
Accuracy of the maneuver during (a portion of) the flight task measured against desired and adequate performance criteria: Heliport Approach Task * Glideslope deviation (desired +-0.7 deg, adequate +-2.1 deg) * Localizer deviation (desired +-0.7 deg, adequate +-2.1 deg) * Helipad boundary crossing height (desired +-10 ft, adequate +-20 ft) * Helipad boundary crossing speed (desired +-5 kts, adequate +-10 kts) * Helipad center deviation (desired +-20 ft, adequate +-60 ft) Lateral Reposition and Hold Task * Ground track deviation (desired +-5 ft, adequate +-10 ft) * Target ground speed deviation (desired +-5 kts, adequate +-8 kts) * Altitude deviation (desired +-5 ft, adequate +-10 ft) * Heading deviation (desired +-10 deg, adequate +-15 deg) * Hover point lateral and longitudinal deviation (desired +-5 ft, adequate +-10 ft)
Motion Fidelity Rating
Time frame: Day 1
Possible answers are: Low Fidelity, Medium Fidelity, High Fidelity
1 secondary outcome
Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ)
Time frame: Day 1
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Apr 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Healthy
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Human Subarachnoid Space Using Intrathecal Gadolinium Contrast
Healthy Volunteers
RecruitingObservational study
Survey to Determine Incarcerated Persons' Views on Surrogate Decision Making
Healthy Volunteers
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
A Study to Learn How Different Amounts of the Study Medicine Called PF-07985631 Are Tolerated and Act in the Body of Healthy Adults
Healthy
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Collection and Distribution of Blood Components From Healthy Donors for In Vitro Research Use
Blood Donors, Apheresis
Recruiting
Metabolic Impact of VLCPUFA-Rich Fish Oil: A Clinical Study on Omega-3 Index Enhancement in Healthy Individuals
Fatty Acids, Omega-3, Fish Oils
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Simulator Motion in people with Healthy, run by National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Apr 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Time to Complete Flight Task Maneuver (Averaged over Repetitions) (time frame: Day 1). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 Apr 2026.