Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

USS McCain collision ultimately caused by UI confusion

arstechnica.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 369 posts

Re: USS McCain collision ultimately caused by UI confusion

#131

Post by [deleted] »

eternalban wrote: post #120
jordanb wrote: post #17

The real cause of the collision was poor seamanship and failure to follow the COLREGS on the part of the bridge crew of the destroyer. Most specifically they were seriously in violation of Rule 6: the Safe Speed Rule http://navruleshandbook.com/Rule6.html Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropr…

> The USS McCain was traveling at over 20 knots at the time of the collision http://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170821080742-04-uss-jo... Sorry. That does not compute. Based on that visual, the ship was dead in the water.

[deleted]

Re: USS McCain collision ultimately caused by UI confusion

#133

Post by JBlue42 »

katastic wrote: post #119
Animats wrote: post #73

There was a ferry accident involving a similar transfer of control problem in New York harbor.[1] Ferries have a lot of maneuvering modes and directional thrusters, because they do so many dockings, and so they have a more complex control problem. The pilot put the system into a backup dumb mode while in cruise, then changed stations to where he could best see the dock while still in the wrong mode. Rammed the dock a…

User interfaces have gone backwards decades in quality. Look at your car radio in a 90's car. You didn't need to look at it to figure out how to push the radio button, turn the volume, anything. You could even adjust the bass on the fly with a bass knob instead of navigating to your "eq" menu to do it. Now, you've got to look away from the road, realize what "mode" your in, you can move the menu around to the "audio"…

Thanks for pointing this out.

As cool as my friends' new car's features are, I still love my Acura RSX. I can reach from the steering wheel to adjust anything on the console without taking my eyes off the road. No fuss, made for human hands, knobs and buttons.

Re: USS McCain collision ultimately caused by UI confusion

#134

Post by jordanb »

eternalban wrote: post #120
jordanb wrote: post #17

The real cause of the collision was poor seamanship and failure to follow the COLREGS on the part of the bridge crew of the destroyer. Most specifically they were seriously in violation of Rule 6: the Safe Speed Rule http://navruleshandbook.com/Rule6.html Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropr…

> The USS McCain was traveling at over 20 knots at the time of the collision http://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170821080742-04-uss-jo... Sorry. That does not compute. Based on that visual, the ship was dead in the water.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/CHINFO/USS+Fitzgerald+and+USS+John+S...

The McCain entered the TSS at 20 knots and varied between 20 and 18 knots until the steering problem began. The OOD ordered the vessel slowed to 5 knots but due to confusion on the bridge the orders weren't carried out properly and the vessel was still making 11.8 knots and turning to port at the moment of impact. The Fitzgerald was also traveling through traffic at 20 knots and narrowly passed three vessels at that speed before finally being struck by the Crystal.

Re: USS McCain collision ultimately caused by UI confusion

#135

Post by userbinator »

katastic wrote: post #119
Animats wrote: post #73

There was a ferry accident involving a similar transfer of control problem in New York harbor.[1] Ferries have a lot of maneuvering modes and directional thrusters, because they do so many dockings, and so they have a more complex control problem. The pilot put the system into a backup dumb mode while in cruise, then changed stations to where he could best see the dock while still in the wrong mode. Rammed the dock a…

User interfaces have gone backwards decades in quality. Look at your car radio in a 90's car. You didn't need to look at it to figure out how to push the radio button, turn the volume, anything. You could even adjust the bass on the fly with a bass knob instead of navigating to your "eq" menu to do it. Now, you've got to look away from the road, realize what "mode" your in, you can move the menu around to the "audio"…

Automotive "climate control" has been around since the mid-60s, and the controls of the early versions were also far more straightforward; basically, one knob for temperature and another for turning the system on/off at various settings. Here's one from 1973:

http://i44.servimg.com/u/f44/16/54/79/13/1973_c12.jpg

Re: USS McCain collision ultimately caused by UI confusion

#136

Post by carterehsmith »

cocoablazing wrote: post #83

A key occurrence during this mishap: 0127 The Officer of the Deck ordered course to the right to course 240T, but rescinded the order within a minute. Instead, the Officer of the Deck ordered an increase to full speed and a rapid turn to the left (port). These orders were not carried out. 0129 The Bosun Mate of the Watch, a more senior supervisor on the bridge, took over the helm and executed the orders. I've witness…

I don't know which one is more bizzare here - the story itself, or the barrage of "this is due to bad UX" comments in this thread.

So I guess if this warship fired all its rockets away, "due to bad UX", and destroyed a small nation, I guess the comments would also be about a bad UX. Oh crumbs, the "check status" button was so close to the "start armageddon" button. Perhaps we should submit a meek complaint to Microsoft or something.

"Commander Alfredo J. Sanchez, "noticed the Helmsman (the watchstander steering the ship) having difficulty maintaining course while also adjusting the throttles for speed control.""

So... we gave the control of a warship to some guy that... has some difficulty navigating through the straits that like 1M of ships go through every day, without problems. Mind you, this is the navy that is supposed to be highly trained to deal with real-world issues such as naval blockades, pirates, and even wars.

It does not make sense at all. Allegedly there were some cuts to funding for navy. Maybe someone is trying to make a point. I do not know, this is just unexplainable. Certainly nothing to do with just "bad UX"

Re: USS McCain collision ultimately caused by UI confusion

#138

Post by pmikesell »

lisper wrote: post #106

It's not just boats that have safety-critical UI design problems. The avionics in airplanes are becoming so complicated that managing the avionics is almost more difficult than flying the plane. I'm a private pilot who has been flying a Cirrus SR22 for twelve years. In that time it has gone through two major glass cockpit avionics revisions. In the first revision, called the Avidyne, the autopilot was either on or of…

nice! Also an SR22 pilot (though I just sold mine a few months ago).

Here are some other G1000 confusions I remember:

- Flying down the ILS expecting to click the "go around" button on the throttle and see the missed approach cycle .... only to find out that the autopilot didn't know I started the approach because I had the wrong leg selected as "active" when I across the IAF (and I've been tracking the green ILS instead of the PINK gps for the approach)

- Given "vectors to final" from ATC, selecting "vectors to final" on the MFD, and then have ATC issue a speed restriction up to some waypoint ... which has now just disappeared because "vectors to final" doesn't display any of the waypoints (I think the logic is that you shouldn't need them, except in this case when you do)

- Doing an approach that has a IAF and IF with a holding pattern. Am I starting the approach from the IAF (in which case I do the hold), or from the IF (in which case I proceed directly to the FAF)? Once I've coordinated that with ATC .... I forgot to tell the autopilot who helpfully started planning for the holding pattern.

Honestly I think the solution here is more automation not less. These systems got so bad because pilots correct for them all the time.

Re: USS McCain collision ultimately caused by UI confusion

#139

Post by Cyph0n »

foobarian wrote: post #129
katastic wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

User interfaces have gone backwards decades in quality. Look at your car radio in a 90's car. You didn't need to look at it to figure out how to push the radio button, turn the volume, anything. You could even adjust the bass on the fly with a bass knob instead of navigating to your "eq" menu to do it. Now, you've got to look away from the road, realize what "mode" your in, you can move the menu around to the "audio"…

Don't get me started about TVs. When I grew up our family TV turned on in seconds, and pressing channel up/down reacted in tens of milliseconds.

To be fair, you weren't getting near-instantaneous full HD quality broadcasting with DVR support on your TV back then.

Re: USS McCain collision ultimately caused by UI confusion

#140

Post by Camillo »

The headline is clickbait, and directly contradicts the report's conclusions. The article says as much ("While the report lays the blame on training"), but by that point you've already clicked.

But look at that bridge schematic. There were TEN PEOPLE in that room, and they couldn't keep an eye on the radar, raise a collision alert, radio the other ship, etc. They just completely lost it.

The John McCain was put in a state of complete confusion by a simple control error they themselves made, while cruising along a commercial shipping lane, at peace. How would they have handled an enemy attack?

Post reply on HN