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: 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.