TXnMA
Posted on 08/15/2019 11:24:55 AM PDT by CedarDave
ding ding ding! We have a winner.
You should never put critical systems in the hands of a software GUI.
Poor software design, not poor technology.
They can’t make it work as well as the ordering kiosk at McD’s?
I despise touchscreens.
But, but, they seem to work fine on the Star Trek Next Generation bridge, especially when used by Data!
Somebody’s lying, when they say bridge design is uncontrolled. There are government approved manuals, specifications, corporate operations manuals submitted to the govt for approval, all before the first check is cut!@ What do you think those Plant Representative Offices, such as navpro, mean?
I wish they’d do this with car radios and most everything else.
And if I was the pope, I’d outlaw the color black for use on electronic and household applicances. Can’t see the labels.
Knobs. Physical switches. Buttons. Large.
I don’t want no plastic saddle, I want to feel that leather, when I ride.
TXnMA
“The step-back in technology will give sailors more tactile feedback and remove the ambiguity and uncertainty ...”
Characterization of this as a “step-back” is a big part of the reason they got to this mess in the first place.
Believing complicated controls and screens are better than simple controls that have been proven to work FOR DECADES is characteristic of the techno-fool mentality that can’t leave well enough alone.
The Techno-twit thinks that controls constantly have to be the most modern, woke, cool, high-tech, advanced, disruptive, transformative, innovative...
Instead, all you get is overcomplicated crap that some millenial idiot thinks is an improvement.
That extends to today's vehicles. I was given a ride in a new Chevy Silverado this morning and the display screen was full of icons and such that likely give TOO much information to the driver so as to distract him. I drive a 2001 P/U that still has regular gauges and some warning lights that tell me the important things to know while driving.
The whole idea of multiple stations having access to maneuvering controls at the same time is appalling.
Nothing like good old-fashioned mechanical systems.
A previous owner retrofitted a whiz-bang radio on my truck. I had to find the manual online just to figure out how to program the channels and find a preset station. I prefer an older model with button and knobs that are intuitive to use.
Being a controls engineer, I have programmed many HMIs (human-machine interface) and I try to keep the buttons and controls as simple and intuitive as possible.
I call bulls**t. The touch screens were designed by geeks for geeks. What they need is for the designers to work with the users and listen to them. The fighter pilots seem to have touch screen technology figured out or else they’d be falling out of the sky. Its just a matter of identifying the problem and applying a good fix, which the Navy is avoiding.
Much less to breakdown, especially during combat situations.
I have NO experience here..
But I would have to assume that two/ four big sticks with knobs/ handles on the top indicating forward or reverse and how fast is a lot easier to understand quickly than just about anything else.
The problem is lack of training. I ensured my guys were drilled on steering casualties almost every time we trained. They knew the system inside and out, and could isolate and configure around virtually any casualty, both in training and actual casualties. There is a reason we have so much redundancy in steering systems. Loss of steering is dangerous! Not knowing how it works is no excuse.
This thread might be of interest to you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.