From: Niels Hilbrink Subject: Re: INDUSTRY: Successful VR Apps Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 11:39:58 +0100 Organization: National Aerospace Laboratory Marc Bernatchez wrote: > Yes, there are some very successful applications in these branches of > development. Especially the ones at NASA. I don't know if the wind > tunnel is commercially used but it's well done. > > Yet a best example of success, their desktop VR system they used to > fix the Hubble telescope. It really saved the day. They had forgot a > flaw in the design and found it soon enough with the VR > simulation. Without it, they could have shipped a flawed fixing > apparatus to the sky and find the problem only when swapping the > mirror elements on the telescope...hard to begin fixing such precision > devices with the astronaut suit! > > There is also the design of the 777 Boeing plane that was built a bit > every where on the planet by separate teams... their only link was a > CAD/pseudo-VR(don't know how much VR it was) system that let them > virtually put it all in one piece all along the development time. Well sure, there all great apps, nut no killer apps ! I think thats what Mark (Mine) is asking for. This is a discussion which surfaces time and time again and no definite answer has yet been given. Most application suffer from, in my opinion, a to narrow target public. Not that that is a bad thing at all, but it limits the succes for VR, succes rated with the common succes scale (price, numerber soled, etc.). I mean the HST repair mission was great, a lot of good data came from those runs, still it's a one time event. The thing we are working on right now (Robot arm trainer) is a pretty good project as far as VR is concerned but only 3 complete sets are ever going to be build, so no big bucks for us ;). But VR is the only way in which we can do simulations/training runs, no WET (Weightless Environment Training = neutral buoyancy tank) model is available, like in the case of the HST (which was just to big to fit, together with the shuttle that is, into a tank) I think it was sikorsky (helicopter man) in an interview said something like: reporter: Can it (the helicopter) fly faster than a plane ? Sikorsky: No ! reporter: can it fly more efficient? Sikorsky: No ! reporter: Can it carry more cargo than a plane ? Sikorsky: No ! reporter: Well than whats the use of the helicopter ? Sikorsky: it can do things no airplane or automobile can do And he was right. The helicopter never conquered the world like the aeroplane although some people thought it would. I remember seeing pictures in which futerists predicted that every one would have a helicopter. Well that didn't come true, did it? I think its the same with VR, it will never counquer the world like the desktop computer has but it will be able to do things no other technology can do. So in order to measure succes one should not look at quantaty or cost price. Though they are important, they are only important when comparing VR-technologies with other VR-technologies. For instance using telepresence apps to work on a kaput satelites in geo-stationary orbit. It is not possible to send an astronaut up to fix it. So if you want to fix it virtual presence is the only option. Same with VR surgery, if you don't want to cut a live or dead patient use a 'living' synthetic one, there are no alernatives. But how do you measure succes on these apps ? I mean these app suffer from no quantaty, hugh costs ! Maybe you could consider the mortality rate amongst people operated by a rookie surgeon as a succes parameter, or the life expectancy of a fixed satelite. Either way it won't be the common perfomance measures that decide the succes of a VR-app. Best regards, Nils Hilbrink A good measure of succes would be the -- ======================================================================== | I didn't really say all the things that I said. You probably didn't | | read what you thought you read. Statistics show that this whole | | thing is more than likely just a hideous misunderstanding. | ======================================================================== Niels Hilbrink (RS NOP) National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR) mailto:Hilbrink@nlr.nl Voorsterweg 31, 8316 PR Marknesse (++31)(0)527 242259 (Home) P.O. Box 153, 8300 AD Emmeloord (++31)(0)527 248724 (NLR) the Netherlands http://www.xs4all.nl/~ripley/Niels/niels.html