SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The US Navy will replace the touchscreen throttle and helm controls currently installed in its destroyers with mechanical ones starting in 2020, says USNI News. The move comes after the National Transportation Safety Board released an accident report from a 2017 collision, which cites the design of the ship’s controls as a factor in the accident.
On August 21st, 2017, the USS John S. McCain collided with the Alnic MC, a Liberian oil tanker, off the coast of Singapore. The report provides a detailed overview of the actions that led to the collision: when crew members tried to split throttle and steering control between consoles, they lost control of the ship, putting it into the path of the tanker. The crash killed 10 sailors and injured 48 aboard the McCain.
The report says that while fatigue and lack of training played a role in the accident, the design of the ship’s control console were also contributing factors. Located in the middle of the McCain’s bridge, the Ship’s Control Console (SCC) features a pair of touch-screens on both the Helm and Lee Helm stations, through which the crew could steer and propel the ship. Investigators found that the crew had placed it in “backup manual mode,” which removed computer-assisted help, because it allowed for “more direct form of communication between steering and the SSC.” That setting meant that any crew member at another station could take over steering operations, and when the crew tried to regain control of the ship from multiple stations, control “shifted from the lee helm, to aft steering, to the helm, and back to aft steering.”
The NTSB report calls out the configuration of the bridge’s systems, pointing out that the decision to transfer controls while in the strait helped lead to the accident, and that the procedures for transferring the controls from one station to another were complicated, further contributing to the confusion. Specifically, the board points to the touchscreens on the bridge, noting that mechanical throttles are generally preferred because “they provide both immediate and tactile feedback to the operator.” The report notes that had mechanical controls been present, the helmsmen would have likely been alerted that there was an issue early on, and recommends that the Navy better adhere to better design standards.
[...] Touchscreens weren’t the only issue in the collision: the report calls out that several crew members on the bridge at the time weren’t familiar with the systems that they were overseeing and were inexperienced in their roles, and that many were fatigued, with an average of 4.9 hours of sleep between the 14 crew members present. The report recommended that the Navy conduct better training for the bridge systems, update the controls and associated documentation, and ensure that Navy personnel aren’t tired when they’re on the job.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by SomeGuy on Monday August 12 2019, @04:00PM (31 children)
A better question is why they use grease screens, I mean touch screens in the first place.
It's all fucking consumer hype, there is zilch technical reason for touch screens. Everyone has known touch screens are stupid since the 1983 HP-150.
There was some sci-fi type TV show on a few months back where they pulled some "futuristic" "high-tech" car out of their butts. Aside from doing some physically impossible things, the "futuristic" part of the design coasted entirely of a bright blue LED glow under the car, AND A FUCKING TABLET TOUCH SCREEN that controlled every aspect of the car.
If that were a real car, it would be an accident waiting to happen because in reality, they would have to constantly look at it to do anything rather than just feeling physical controls that don't rearrange. And yea, I know there are some media center pieces of crap like that. Things should be sued out of existence, but drooling consumertards think it is cool.
Will reading from 1980s overhead transparency paper be in style next year?
(Score: 2) by mechanicjay on Monday August 12 2019, @04:07PM (1 child)
Except for a physical Steering input, Brake and Go pedals, you've basically described the inside of a Tesla.
My VMS box beat up your Windows box.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Rupert Pupnick on Monday August 12 2019, @06:14PM
Which is one reason why I’ll never buy a Tesla. Being able to adjust a control without having to look at it is a good thing.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 12 2019, @04:08PM (3 children)
Yup. Touchscreens are a shitty interface. Always. Sometimes they're less shitty than any viable alternative but this is quite rare.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 12 2019, @06:00PM (1 child)
When I was involved in the design of electronics for the military*, our briefing included the words "remember the guy using this equipment may be upside down in a ditch with people shooting at him. He will not be able to read anything. All controls must be not just identifiable by touch while disoriented, but also usable".
OK, so that was in the 1970's and there were no touch screens.
* Obligatory: If I told you what it did, I would have to kill you.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Tuesday August 13 2019, @08:48AM
> Obligatory: If I told you what it did, I would have to kill you.
Automated flush in the portaloos?
(Score: 4, Informative) by Freeman on Monday August 12 2019, @06:30PM
I like the touchscreen on my Nook, but I love the page turn buttons on the side.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ikanreed on Monday August 12 2019, @04:15PM (18 children)
A defense contractor can charge 50k for a "digital control interface" and only 2k for "a button"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 12 2019, @04:21PM (3 children)
but but ... you need MORE buttons to replace one touchscreen (maybe)?
(Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Monday August 12 2019, @05:28PM (2 children)
If you need that many more buttons, you probably need to re-think what you are trying to do with the system in the first place, especially on a critical system.
The bigger issue is too often requirements are along the line of "we want a fancy gadget, but we don't know what we want to do with it". Which means everything has to be software oriented. So controls wind up being generic mouse/keyboard/touch/whatever input.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday August 12 2019, @06:35PM
The bigger issue is too often requirements are along the line of "we want a fancy gadget, but we don't know what we want to do with it".
What you need is the Annihilator 2000 [youtube.com]
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday August 12 2019, @10:35PM
Tell this to jet liner manufacturer, the bloody bastards clearly didn't get to the wisdom of replacing all those buttons and throttles and whatnot with a single scroll wheel [theonion.com] (grin).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 12 2019, @04:24PM (13 children)
Nah, you're not up on your military doublespeak. A button is a digital control interface.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday August 12 2019, @04:35PM (12 children)
I very much "digital interface with optically aligned high density liquid crystal rasterization buffer, including non-haptic capacitive sensor grid linked to central control MCU framework" and up the price to 200k
(Score: 3, Interesting) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 12 2019, @05:26PM (11 children)
Good from a marketing angle but it would need to have a shorter name to be called internally to the military. Any more than four words is pushing it. Like I could totally see "human-septic interface toggle" as the name for a military toilet flush lever. Short, technically accurate, and bloody stupid are the three characteristics you're going for in naming. Bonus points for short, letter/number combo model names, like the "OPENER, CAN, HAND, FOLDING, TYPE I", which is also known as the P38 can opener [wikipedia.org].
Side note, that last is one sweet piece of equipment. It's smaller than your thumb, folds flat, can fit on a keychain, and can open most any can in ten seconds or less in experienced hands.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 12 2019, @07:36PM (3 children)
septic-human interface toggle, AKA SHIT. How the actual hell did you miss that?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 12 2019, @07:43PM
^^ Nobody gets one past *you*.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday August 13 2019, @02:57AM (1 child)
Fighting a cold. I tip my hat to you for the rebound though.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Informative) by FatPhil on Tuesday August 13 2019, @07:53AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 12 2019, @11:15PM (1 child)
This is the thing that most people who make fun of, "lol, a $5000 hammer" don't understand. Military stuff has weird requirements, being meant to be used in extreme circumstances, sometimes with literally life-and-death consequences. Sure having an extra 3 ounces doesn't sound like a big deal, and if it breaks just get a new one... until you are carrying it all day every day, and if it breaks from being run over by a truck and there is literally no replacement within 50 miles.
I'd rather have a $5000 hammer guaranteed (and tested) to never produce a spark if I need to work around jet fuel. Sure that $5 one I can get from my local Home Depot might work 99.9% of the time, but would you want to use it?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday August 13 2019, @01:22AM
Odds are good the military is paying $50 for the hammer, and $4950 for the spy satellite.
(Score: 2) by coolgopher on Tuesday August 13 2019, @02:10AM (2 children)
Hah! We even got that P38 in Sweden! The short lever action made it a bit of a pain on the more solid cans, but overall it's a very elegant tool. Damn near unbreakable too.
(Score: 2) by RedBear on Tuesday August 13 2019, @11:23PM (1 child)
P51 is larger and stronger, with two crimped-in “backbone” stiffeners instead of one. Much easier to use without breaking your fingers on heavy or large cans. Highly recommended over the original P38 can opener.
¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
(Score: 2) by coolgopher on Wednesday August 14 2019, @01:44AM
I was not aware of its existence - thanks for pointing it out!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by driverless on Tuesday August 13 2019, @02:41AM (1 child)
Russian method [ammunitionstore.com] is more economical.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 13 2019, @04:07PM
You can open any modern can using only a sturdy knife, which comes as a standard equipment in any country's military.
(Score: 2) by looorg on Monday August 12 2019, @06:55PM (1 child)
So politicians can feel like they are on the starship Enterprise when they come and visit and then know where all the billions of tax money went.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 12 2019, @08:08PM
...and it goes "ping".
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 12 2019, @08:23PM (1 child)
In fairness, that does sound very futuristic. The, "form before function" was pioneered by Apple (remember the "iMac, it comes in different colors!"), and is very much a modern invention. Boring-but-practical was so 1980s. The future has been "shiny, but impractical to use" for some time now.
Futuristic doesn't mean "better," and if I draw a straight-line forecast, a car with sleek-looking-but-useless LEDs and touchscreen-everything sounds very reasonable. Depressing, but reasonable.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by EEMac on Tuesday August 13 2019, @12:15AM
I LOVED my "space egg" iMac! That thing looked absolutely fantastic with all the components in once place. Just plug in power, the keyboard, and the phone jack, and I was on the internet! So neat, so clean!
. . . for about a month. Over the next two years, I added:
1. A better keyboard, which meant the mouse needed its own extension cord.
2. A DVD burner so I could actually, you know, back stuff up
3. A video capture device to input photos and videos to friends
4. Speakers better than the (admittedly decent) ones included
5. A printer
6. A webcam
7. A connection for my digital camera
By the time I was done, I had a spaghetti system of cables all over the place. Kind of like a PC tower or PowerMac, but without the power or expandability.
My most recent computer is a PC tower. The boring-but-practical 1980s would be proud! Sure, there's cables. But they're there for a reason, and buying something prettier doesn't get rid of them.
(Score: 2) by EEMac on Tuesday August 13 2019, @12:29AM
Touch screens are FANTASTIC where they make options visible and available. Touch screens are AWFUL when they replace physical controls that worked better.
Car stereo examples:
Touch screen radio station selection? Can be done very well. You no longer need to remember which button maps to which station - it shows you on the screen before you choose.
Touch screen Bluetooth pairing? Not a terrible idea.
Touch screen graphic equalizer? If it's not adjusted often, I'm on board.
Touch screen volume control? OH HELL NO.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday August 13 2019, @03:27AM
Here's another reason: in a damp environment (which the ocean sorta is) electronic controls fail a lot sooner and less predictably than do mechanical controls, because dampness plus microcircuits equals corrosion in progress.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.