Live data from Hacker News

US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

theverge.com

11–20 of 458 posts

Re: US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

#11
post #3

Duh. Especially if an EMP hit.

Yes but instead of worrying about the theoretical EMP that has never happened and will never happen how about we worry about the fact that we keep crashing into merchant ships like on the regular?

Engineering priorities and all that.

Re: US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

#12
post #5

You know, I think touchscreens are not preferable unless you need/want to be able to have controls for many different systems in the same space (e.g. a smartphone with multiple apps). If you are needing a dedicated control for a high-stakes system, the fact that it's a more modern-looking interface should not matter. Touchscreens are inherently inferior to a mechanical interface, if it's a single-system (i.e. doesn't…

This is why I detest touchscreens for most car functions. Specifically AC, with old fashioned knobs I have full control over AC without taking my eyes off the road, but nowadays everyone wants to put it on their infotainment system, hidden beneath 4 other buttons.

I have knobs on the climate control on my car, but I still need to look at the screen. The problem is the knobs have no stops so I still need to look down to figure out what they're set to after they update the electronic display. On my old vehicle I knew the whole way to the left was fan blowing on feet, whole way to the right was defroster, and the 2 or 3 clicks in between were different settings of those extremes. Now I have no idea where it ends up when I spin the dial.

Re: US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

#13

I'm having trouble visualizing exactly how this works from the text, but it sounds like a total nightmare. Some sort of complicated list of steps for transferring control screens between different stations on the ship, and it's not clear why or when you do this at all. I'm guessing the Navy doesn't spend a lot of time on UI/UX, which is ironic since these long, high-stress shifts with lives on the line is exactly whe…

In my own experience, any software developed under government contract has horrendous UI/UX. Probably because it's hard to specify "don't suck and be pleasant to use" in terms of formal system requirements.

Re: US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

#14
post #6

You know, I think touchscreens are not preferable unless you need/want to be able to have controls for many different systems in the same space (e.g. a smartphone with multiple apps). If you are needing a dedicated control for a high-stakes system, the fact that it's a more modern-looking interface should not matter. Touchscreens are inherently inferior to a mechanical interface, if it's a single-system (i.e. doesn't…

Well user familiarity is important but not paramount. The Navy uses Xbox controllers in submarines and found that the learning curve for 19-year-old men is much better that way

This is different. The issue here wasn’t the use of a general-purpose device itself but that the device they used (a touchscreen) wasn’t the best fit for the task at hand. Even worse, multiple screens were able to control the ship at the same time which to me seems to be the root cause of the accident. A single touchscreen still wouldn’t have been ideal, but it would’ve still prevented the accident IMO.

In the case of using Xbox controllers it’s actually a great idea - these controllers were designed & refined over decades of intensive use by all kinds of people around the world - you wouldn’t be able to do better even if you tried with a custom design. There are obvious concerns regarding reliability of the hardware, but the design itself is in my opinion flawless.

Re: US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

#15

I'm having trouble visualizing exactly how this works from the text, but it sounds like a total nightmare. Some sort of complicated list of steps for transferring control screens between different stations on the ship, and it's not clear why or when you do this at all. I'm guessing the Navy doesn't spend a lot of time on UI/UX, which is ironic since these long, high-stress shifts with lives on the line is exactly whe…

In my own experience, any software developed under government contract has horrendous UI/UX. Probably because it's hard to specify "don't suck and be pleasant to use" in terms of formal system requirements.

Also because the people paying for the system aren’t the ones that will end up using it day to day. The system looks nice enough for the bean counters to approve it based on looks without soliciting actual user feedback (partly because those users are way lower down the food chain but also because of the mindset of the bean counters - they see it looks nice from their perspective but aren’t aware of the benefit of user testing).

Re: US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

#16
Someone needs to go to basics of ergonomics.

That strange actually. I do remember ergonomics lectures in university were presented by lecturer wearing army uniform as these guys were deadly (literally) serious about it and consequences. At least in USSR and at USSR time.

Re: US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

#18
post #5

You know, I think touchscreens are not preferable unless you need/want to be able to have controls for many different systems in the same space (e.g. a smartphone with multiple apps). If you are needing a dedicated control for a high-stakes system, the fact that it's a more modern-looking interface should not matter. Touchscreens are inherently inferior to a mechanical interface, if it's a single-system (i.e. doesn't…

This is why I detest touchscreens for most car functions. Specifically AC, with old fashioned knobs I have full control over AC without taking my eyes off the road, but nowadays everyone wants to put it on their infotainment system, hidden beneath 4 other buttons.

Yesterday I was driving back from Scotland to England, doing 70ish, when we ran into a really heavy thunderstorm. Went from good visibility to almost zero in seconds, and the only thing I could properly see was the crash barrier alongside the lane. I found myself desperately trying to see where the road was, simultaneously trying not to get rear-ended as I slowed up, switch on the rear fog lamps and hazards, max wipers, and select max demist because suddenly the windscreen had fogged up. Was one of those thankfully-rare maximum mental workload moments. Thank god for manual controls and muscle memory. Pretty such I wouldn't have had enough spare attention and/or brainpower left over for operating a touchscreen.

Re: US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

#19

I'm having trouble visualizing exactly how this works from the text, but it sounds like a total nightmare. Some sort of complicated list of steps for transferring control screens between different stations on the ship, and it's not clear why or when you do this at all. I'm guessing the Navy doesn't spend a lot of time on UI/UX, which is ironic since these long, high-stress shifts with lives on the line is exactly whe…

Transferring controls between stations seems to have obvious utility if you consider the desire to relieve sailors without removing others from their stations. Give the helmsman a bathroom break by transferring the controls to another's station rather than having the people move to the controls. The whole splitting of throttle/steering controls seems a bit odd to me however. I can't imagine a situation where I was at…

> The whole splitting of throttle/steering controls seems a bit odd to me however. I can't imagine a situation where I was at the helm and didn't want the throttle at my command as well.

We lost electricity on our yacht at sea. There are electronic controls for both steering and throttle at the helm but none of them worked for a time. Because the yacht had two screws and the manual throttle control was in the engine room, we were able to steer and navigate the yacht with a man in the engine room with a radio. Traditionally throttle is the responsibility for engineering because there is a lot more going on with a ship than a car throttle.

Re: US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

#20
post #3

Duh. Especially if an EMP hit.

Yes but instead of worrying about the theoretical EMP that has never happened and will never happen how about we worry about the fact that we keep crashing into merchant ships like on the regular? Engineering priorities and all that.

the theoretical EMP that has never happened

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_storm_of_1859

> Telegraph systems all over Europe and North America failed, in some cases giving telegraph operators electric shocks.[20] Telegraph pylons threw sparks. [..]

> In June 2013, a joint venture [..] used data from the Carrington Event to estimate the current cost of a similar event to the U.S. alone at $0.6–2.6 trillion.[2] [..]

> The solar storm of 2012 was of similar magnitude, but it passed Earth's orbit without striking the planet, missing by nine days.[4]

Post reply on HN