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

US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 458 posts

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

#21

Post by amluto »

Nextgrid wrote: post #14
paggle wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 o…

I would add a major caveat: Xbox controllers don’t have physical feedback the way an actual throttle lever or steering wheel does. See, for example, the endless arguments over whether the Boeing control style (where the position of a control means something) is better or worse than the Airbus style (where the position of a control is just an input).

If I were designing a destroyer control, I would probably make the throttle be some sort of device where the position of the device indicates the throttle state. But I would certainly make the throttle be a single-purpose device that controls nothing else.

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

#22

Post by bartread »

Nextgrid wrote: post #14
paggle wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 o…

Exactly: Xbox controllers are highly tactile and ergonomically designed so that they can be used effectively without ever having to look at them. In-car touchscreens are a menace, and a design fad that I cannot wait to see pass.

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

#23

Post by dmix »

We still use controllers for most video games over keyboards/mice or touch pads for a good reasons related to how games are played (from a couch vs desk) or the types of games.

No human computer interface is a panacea. It should always be a mix for any complex system, not either/or.

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

#24

Post by hrktb »

rossdavidh wrote: post #2

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…

As with everything it depends. Throwing a whole category of input under the bus because it failed when we tried in some uses would be short-sighted. Especially as we’ve had touchscreens for less than a few decades.

> inherently inferior / single-system

From the top of my head, maps work better on touchscreens. Navigating document trees. Making elements link together, group them. And there must be hundreds of uses not obvious now because we haven’t tried enough.

Actually I don’t see how any input system would not have some high-stake single system where it’s a perfect fit. That would just be failure of imagination in my opinion.

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

#25

Post by a3n »

heelix wrote: post #17

Flying in bumpy weather, the touch screens can be tricky to do precision presses. End up having to balance your finger on the edge of the Garmin and then touch. I can imagine rough seas being a similar issue.

Rough roads too.

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

#26

Post by Quequau »

Recently I've taken up metal machining as a semi-serious hobby. Fully automated CNC machines don't entirely fit my use-cases but for a couple of them LinuxCNC works fine. The primary UI for LinuxCNC is a touchscreen and frankly it's a frustrating limitation.

LCD Touchscreens are just not well suited for that sort of environment. Legit OEM CNC controls are better but honestly every time I use one I can't but feel like that by now we should have figured out something better. Something that is very robust and can stand up well in harsh environments. Something very easy to read, even for folks with poor vision. Something usable while wearing some sorts of thin(ish) gloves. But I've yet to find anything that would be better.

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

#28

Post by inflatableDodo »

dmix wrote: post #23

We still use controllers for most video games over keyboards/mice or touch pads for a good reasons related to how games are played (from a couch vs desk) or the types of games. No human computer interface is a panacea. It should always be a mix for any complex system, not either/or.

>We still use controllers for video games over keyboards/mice

Not that good an example, at least for first person shooters.

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

#29

Post by VBprogrammer »

newnewpdro wrote: post #10
situational87 wrote: post #4

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…

Only a few decades ago navy ships would have been oil fired boilers with steam turbines. Adjusting throttles wasn't a case of moving a lever. A valve had to be moved by hand, changing the flow to the turbine. This had to be done in concert with the guys in the boiler room. Doing so may have required lighting up a number of extra burners in the boiler or changing the size of the nozzles in use.

Of course modern diesel engines are more flexible. You might still have to fire up the gas turbines on a modern navy vessel which would at least require checking oil etc.

The systems in use likely haven't evolved far for a number of reasons.

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

#30

Post by watwatinthewat »

situational87 wrote: post #4

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…

I work at a Navy research center. We don't try to be profitable but take DoD clients to cover costs, trying to break even yearly. The point there is we are mission or tax funded but work for customers.

The projects in my department take customer data, process/develop it in some way, and push it back out. Since we don't deal with the display at the end, there is a constant push for slides, demos, etc., from management to help sell it.

Hacked up demos by non-ui software engineers then became the product, and we have million dollar contracts coming for a mobile app and something that works in the browser.

The center's selling point is it's way cheaper than a private company or contractor, so subcontracting a UI designer isn't an option. I'm sure we'll have a working product, but it will probably be something like you describe. We shouldn't have taken it on, but when someone with money says, "I love it! How much?" it's hard to say no.

This is not an uncommon situation.

Post reply on HN