3 ms·

What does EFIS stand for? And, could I get you started on the touch screen trend?

by bmer 8y ago

calvinmorrison 8y ago
Electronic Flight Information System. The flight deck information display, but not mechanical, digital.
danaliv 8y ago
Touch screens installed in the instrument panel are very hard to use in even light-to-moderate turbulence. Have someone shake your phone around while you try to dial a number and you’ll have some idea of the difficulty. Knobs, and to a lesser extent physical buttons, give you something to hold onto. It may not sound like much of a difference but in my experience it’s much, much less error-prone to have hardware inputs when the aircraft is getting bounced around.
- thaumasiotes 8y ago
  Touch screens in cars are also a huge step backwards in usability from the buttons and knobs they replaced. I'm not sure why the switch happened.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    For cars, my guess would be that a) it allows you to entirely disconnect the UI work from the work on actual car, and run it in parallel, and b) it looks cool and futuristic in ads. I don't see how either would apply for planes, though. There, I suspect it's an attempt to manage the amount of data a pilot needs to see at any given moment, and to enable equipment changes without rebuilding the cockpit.
    - int_19h 8y ago
      The worst part of this trend is that now that the touch UX is handled entirely in software, the remaining physical controls often are as well. In my 2018 Subaru Outback, for example, the physical volume knob doesn't work until the system has "booted" completely, even though it might already be blasting music or radio resumed from the last time it was shut down. So there's those 2-3 seconds where there's no way to reduce volume, mute, anything.
  - tsukikage 8y ago
    More stuff to configure, then cost. Switching to modal screen-based interfaces happens when there isn't enough room on the panel in question to supply a separate physical control per thing that needs controlling. Once you've had to do that, though, every remaining knob is a cost that could be removed by adding a few lines of code to the interface software. A single touchscreen for everything is the natural endpoint of this process.
  - zeveb 8y ago
    > Touch screens in cars are also a huge step backwards in usability from the buttons and knobs they replaced. I'm not sure why the switch happened. Because 'ooh, shiny!' That's my best guess, anyway. Although there is a benefit to being able to deploy a new control configuration with a software change, I think it's far outweighed by having something physical to hold when operating the controls. … and one wouldn't want the controls one is used to changing anyway …
    - thaumasiotes 8y ago
      Specifically, you can't use a touchscreen without looking at it. You can locate and press a button or turn a knob without needing to look at it.
- yellowapple 8y ago
  I can already notice this just from driving a car with a touchscreen-driven center console v. one with buttons and knobs. I'm hesitant to buy a new car for a myriad of reasons, that being among them. Plus, fixed touchscreens on cars, planes, equipment, etc. tend to be resistive ones, and those can be very annoying to use even when they're perfectly still.
- sokoloff 8y ago
  Most touch screen panel mount avionics provide some kind of anchor to connect the static part of your hand to operate. (Rest your thumb here or pinky side here and operate with the index finger.) I was worried about the issue, but in light turbulence, it’s no issue IME and in moderate, it’s maybe less certain than knobs, but I bet even there that I could still enter an accurate flight plan update, whether a new full route and just a direct-to shortcut) faster on the touch GTN 750 than on an old (multi-knob) GNS 530. (That’s not just touch; it’s partially the discoverability and access to “more than the -D-> key” functions.) I am glad the critical autopilot inputs (HSI heading bug) and other flight controls are not touch, though.
  - SomeHacker44 8y ago
    I like the anchors - but I use them to anchor me for pushing the hard buttons and twisting knobs instead. Of course, I personally avoided putting in (mostly) button free avionics like the mentioned Garmin GTN series in my plane. I fly them in other planes, and they are well featured, but I just personally prefer hard buttons. Also, knobs in turbulence are fun. "Turn left 15 degrees" can become a random amount on your heading bug with an unfortunately timed thump! Anyway, bottom line is that I find it easier to see the relative angles and trends of the pointers in old analog gauges in turbulence than read the tapes. The angles meant something easily interpreted as being unexpected at a glance even if the absolute value might take another moment to read. Imagine if our AI were two tapes, like the EFIS horizontal and vertical deviation indicators!!
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

What does EFIS stand for? And, could I get you started on the touch screen trend?

by bmer 8y ago

What does EFIS stand for? And, could I get you started on the touch screen trend?

calvinmorrison 8y ago

Electronic Flight Information System. The flight deck information display, but not mechanical, digital.

danaliv 8y ago

Touch screens installed in the instrument panel are very hard to use in even light-to-moderate turbulence. Have someone shake your phone around while you try to dial a number and you’ll have some idea of the difficulty. Knobs, and to a lesser extent physical buttons, give you something to hold onto. It may not sound like much of a difference but in my experience it’s much, much less error-prone to have hardware inputs when the aircraft is getting bounced around.

thaumasiotes 8y ago
Touch screens in cars are also a huge step backwards in usability from the buttons and knobs they replaced. I'm not sure why the switch happened.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  For cars, my guess would be that a) it allows you to entirely disconnect the UI work from the work on actual car, and run it in parallel, and b) it looks cool and futuristic in ads. I don't see how either would apply for planes, though. There, I suspect it's an attempt to manage the amount of data a pilot needs to see at any given moment, and to enable equipment changes without rebuilding the cockpit.
  - int_19h 8y ago
    The worst part of this trend is that now that the touch UX is handled entirely in software, the remaining physical controls often are as well. In my 2018 Subaru Outback, for example, the physical volume knob doesn't work until the system has "booted" completely, even though it might already be blasting music or radio resumed from the last time it was shut down. So there's those 2-3 seconds where there's no way to reduce volume, mute, anything.
- tsukikage 8y ago
  More stuff to configure, then cost. Switching to modal screen-based interfaces happens when there isn't enough room on the panel in question to supply a separate physical control per thing that needs controlling. Once you've had to do that, though, every remaining knob is a cost that could be removed by adding a few lines of code to the interface software. A single touchscreen for everything is the natural endpoint of this process.
- zeveb 8y ago
  > Touch screens in cars are also a huge step backwards in usability from the buttons and knobs they replaced. I'm not sure why the switch happened. Because 'ooh, shiny!' That's my best guess, anyway. Although there is a benefit to being able to deploy a new control configuration with a software change, I think it's far outweighed by having something physical to hold when operating the controls. … and one wouldn't want the controls one is used to changing anyway …
  - thaumasiotes 8y ago
    Specifically, you can't use a touchscreen without looking at it. You can locate and press a button or turn a knob without needing to look at it.
yellowapple 8y ago
I can already notice this just from driving a car with a touchscreen-driven center console v. one with buttons and knobs. I'm hesitant to buy a new car for a myriad of reasons, that being among them. Plus, fixed touchscreens on cars, planes, equipment, etc. tend to be resistive ones, and those can be very annoying to use even when they're perfectly still.
sokoloff 8y ago
Most touch screen panel mount avionics provide some kind of anchor to connect the static part of your hand to operate. (Rest your thumb here or pinky side here and operate with the index finger.) I was worried about the issue, but in light turbulence, it’s no issue IME and in moderate, it’s maybe less certain than knobs, but I bet even there that I could still enter an accurate flight plan update, whether a new full route and just a direct-to shortcut) faster on the touch GTN 750 than on an old (multi-knob) GNS 530. (That’s not just touch; it’s partially the discoverability and access to “more than the -D-> key” functions.) I am glad the critical autopilot inputs (HSI heading bug) and other flight controls are not touch, though.
- SomeHacker44 8y ago
  I like the anchors - but I use them to anchor me for pushing the hard buttons and twisting knobs instead. Of course, I personally avoided putting in (mostly) button free avionics like the mentioned Garmin GTN series in my plane. I fly them in other planes, and they are well featured, but I just personally prefer hard buttons. Also, knobs in turbulence are fun. "Turn left 15 degrees" can become a random amount on your heading bug with an unfortunately timed thump! Anyway, bottom line is that I find it easier to see the relative angles and trends of the pointers in old analog gauges in turbulence than read the tapes. The angles meant something easily interpreted as being unexpected at a glance even if the absolute value might take another moment to read. Imagine if our AI were two tapes, like the EFIS horizontal and vertical deviation indicators!!

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]