25 ms·

US Navy will replace touchscreen with mechanical controls on its destroyers

• rossdavidh 7y ago
  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 need to morph into a different and back again).
  • jakear 7y ago
    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.
    • adestefan 7y ago
      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.
      • indigochill 7y ago
        I'm not sure why dials have stopped clicking. Maybe it had some direct mechanical function at one point, but even if that's no longer necessary, the haptic feedback of the click seems just as important. In fact, even on touchscreens there will often be some sort of audiovisual "click" effect, whether that's an icon lighting up, expanding, or making an audible click noise.
      • baroffoos 7y ago
        My method is to turn the knob back to when it stops moving and then it is now in a known state and I know how many clicks each setting is away.
        • adestefan 7y ago
          That’s the thing it doesn’t stop. It’s just a rotary dial with the lightest detents I’ve ever felt. You just spin it and it’s a circular buffer through every setting.
    • mhandley 7y ago
      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.
      • blackflame7000 7y ago
        You know, when you take your drivers test in the US, you have to demonstrate your ability to know where all those functions are before you even pull away to start your test.
        • vinay427 7y ago
          This depends on the state/region. There's no universal standard in the US, and some states definitely don't require the operation of all of these controls before the test.
          • blackflame7000 7y ago
            Just because it's not on your test doesn't mean you shouldn't know how to operate your car properly. There's a lot not covered in each test that is still a requirement to operate a vehicle. In California, it is a requirement and all the roads are connected. Blaming a change in weather is unsafe. This is why we have so many accidents when it rains. Do you freak out when it gets dark because there are 4 touchscreen buttons to press to turn your lights on? So why when it rains? If you wanna make excuses for "I got myself into a dangerous situation because I wasn't prepared" go ahead but when it endangers other drivers I have to be critical.
            • 7y ago
    • Someone1234 7y ago
      This is often repeated but not the complete picture. Modern, knob based, vehicle climate control systems actually bury a lot of functionality. For example Toyota's "automatic" AC you can either pick between fully automatic or a subset of manual controls. That's because they ran out of space/complexity headroom for more controls. Touch screen climate control integrates better with voice (which you should be using while driving), offers better fine-grain control, more information (like CURRENT interior temp rather than just outside/target temp), and can offer new functionality (like profiles/pre-sets, additional automatic modes, memory climate, linked seat heat & cool/positional vents, etc). I dislike several touch screen based climate control systems I've used. But that's because they're BAD. Car manufacturers are bad at making touch screen systems. But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. There's a lot of good reasons to go that direction, car manufacturers just need to work on UX a lot.
      • ocdtrekkie 7y ago
        I feel like you're making some very false choices between smarts/voice compatibility and physical controls. Physical buttons and dials for users to interact with that still can be changed by the system are wholly possible. For instance, a rocker switch that sits in the middle can be used to issue on and off commands, while being separate from say, a status light that lets you know whether the device is on or off. Which is to say, I think you're significantly limiting what you believe is possible with physical UX.
        • Someone1234 7y ago
          > Physical buttons and dials for users to interact with that still can be changed by the system are wholly possible. Sure, but irrational. One of the largest benefits of physical controls is physical feedback, like being about to feel if you've reached the max cold/hot ceilings or the state of the switches. To make them voice compatible you have to remove that physical association (e.g. infinite spinners, or blind switches), which means now you need to take your eyes off the road to use them, which was major perk of physical controls. Physical controls that have no physical state are the worst of both worlds. You've lost the physical and electronic control's advantages while adding the disadvantages to both.
    • HomeDeLaPot 7y ago
      Absolutely agree. Controls with tactile feedback are literally lifesavers when you're trying to pay attention to the road. Touchscreens are cool, but all the basic controls should be presented as neat panels of knobs and buttons that don't require so much as a glance to operate.
    • droithomme 7y ago
      > I detest touchscreens for most car functions Agreed. I consider them dangerous, a threat to public safety, they should be banned by the NTSB, and some cars that use them should be under recall to retrofit them with mechanical controls. Many states are now passing hands free laws that criminalize the use of phones or any other devices that use your hands while driving. The states provide exceptions for car touch screen use, but they shouldn't. They should criminalize the use of all touch screens when driving, not just some.
      • minitoar 7y ago
        This is a good idea but a recall is too much for this to be practical. At least the NTSB should be doing this for all new cars.
      • brewdad 7y ago
        I had this discussion with my teenage child this week and neither of us are sure. Our state requires handsfree phone use but has the car touchscreen exception. Would operating Android Auto or CarPlay be illegal or does it fall under the allowed exceptions?
        • deleted 7y ago
          [deleted]
      • johnbrodie 7y ago
        For the life of me I can't understand why touch screens built in to a car are considered "different" than phones. Cities and states are finally waking up and making it a crime to use your phone while driving, how in the world are car touch screens any different?
        • userbinator 7y ago
          I suspect it's more because using your phone is almost definitely not controlling the car, while using a touchscreen that is part of the car's controls is still technically considered "operating the vehicle" and thus not a distraction, regardless of how difficult it is to actually operate.
    • mcv 7y ago
      You're not the only one who detests touchscreens in cars. Mazda agrees with you[0]. I think touch screens are primarily useful for complex interfaces and interfaces that change every time. But driving a car needs to be as easy and reliable as possible, because you need those eyes and brainpower on the road, not trying to figure out an interface. [0] https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1121372_why-mazda-is-purging-touchscreens-from-its-vehicles https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1121372_why-mazda-is-pur...
    • elihu 7y ago
      For what it's worth, Mazda recently decided that it doesn't want touchscreens in its cars anymore because they're a safety hazard. "Mazda is purging touchscreens from its vehicles" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20200335 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20200335
      • Keyframe 7y ago
        Old Panamera and new Panamera. Disgusting and disorienting touch controls. I honestly can’t tell why would anyone prefer touch controls. I also can’t honestly tell how is Tesla’s screen street legal.
      • sundvor 7y ago
        I had a top model Mazda 3 2014 before (manual Astina) as the #2 and everything about it was just first class usability wise. The rotary navigation knob let me do everything on the screen, and all the buttons for everything else were in intuitive places. Also a great radar cruise control, simple yet highly functional HUD, and things like rear cross alert which is amazing when backing out of 45 degree parking spots next to some big trucks. As much as I'd love a Tesla as my next car I'm not sure if their UI is where I want to go. Presently riding to save my health, and money.
    • agumonkey 7y ago
      Plus GUIs are random in temrs of response time...
    • rkagerer 7y ago
      I'm going to repeat a comment I made a couple times before as I think it's relevant: In one of the talks at Google I/O a few years ago a VP from Audi (or Volvo?) spoke in a thick and lofty German accent about how "ve haf completely oferhauled ze driver exzperienze". He played a sexy video clip showcasing their new Android infotainment system (something like https://youtu.be/h_7_fKJ0PNs https://youtu.be/h_7_fKJ0PNs), and the first thing I noticed is how they'd taken away my traditional temperature knobs and replaced them with digital touchscreen ones. They looked just like physical ones, and were in the exact same place you would expect (https://9to5google.com/2017/05/15/android-cars-audi/ https://9to5google.com/2017/05/15/android-cars-audi/). So, I've gained absolutely nothing, and now I have to take my eyes off the road and look down at the stupid console just to change the temperature. TLDR: Tacticle feedback is a Good Thing(tm) and designers should cultivate - not fight - muscle memory.
    • wincy 7y ago
      There’s a part of me that misses T9 texting on my cell phones. There was a time that I was very good at T9, and because it was deterministic (with auto complete off) you could text without looking and it’d text exactly what you meant. Definitely can’t do that now, and voice controls aren’t as good.
      • batbomb 7y ago
        I can text without looking on iPhone 5/SE, but that went away with the 8
    • tfha 7y ago
      The emergency brake. I really need that to be a mechanical lever and not an electrical one. If something is going wrong on the road I need a backup brake that takes me under a second to activate while in a state of panic with my eyes glued to the road and it had better be functional.
      • p2t2p 7y ago
        That’s the worst thing you could do. You block your wheels and you totally loose control over the vehicle. ABS enabled bakes do stop you quicker while maintaining control over the vehicle.
        • jakear 7y ago
          ABS is not much help when your breaks fail. I think that's what GP was referring to.
    • deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  • paggle 7y ago
    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
    • Nextgrid 7y ago
      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.
      • amluto 7y ago
        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.
      • bartread 7y ago
        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.
        • zrobotics 7y ago
  • Iv 7y ago
    I really think that nowadays touchscreens are becoming the cheap option. To me when I see a machine with custom designed button I know they had to do some mechanical design, whereas a flat touch screen just says "we slapped a tablet there and hacked an interface on android".
    • tempguy9999 7y ago
      Which is ironic because I'd happily pay more not to have one. I bought a replacement for my 10+ year old MP3 player. The new thing is so cool and slick and flat and sophisticated and plain complex, and it's horrible to use. It demands your attention for everything. My old MP3 player with its physical buttons and weird control lever, well, I could work it by touch and muscle memory.
      • arkh 7y ago
        It's why I like my Up!: they decided everyone already has their own touchscreen with infotainment. So you have a dock for your phone, a USB charger and a bluetooth enabled sound system. The rest uses mechanical controls.
      • maxmunzel 7y ago
        That reminds me of how great of a device my iPod shuffle was. To bad the battery died..,
      • TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
        It's interesting that despite Apple's no-buttons obsession, even the latest iPhone still has a physical silent-mode switch and volume buttons.
        • toxik 7y ago
          I don’t think Apple is against buttons, just not on the screen. Gotta say I think it’s pretty weird they have a silent mode button, and a Do Not Disturb mode hidden in the controls? What is that duplication about?
  • hrktb 7y ago
    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.
    • BurningFrog 7y ago
      Right. For anything dynamic, an interface that can redraw itself in milliseconds has enormous advantages over mechanical knobs and levers. For managing permanent properties, I think mechanical interfaces are the best option, though of course vastly more costly.
      • hrktb 7y ago
        You are right, but I think it goes beyond that. Any control interface is by definition acting on something dynamic, so even pushing a physical button, we expect the some status to reflect the result instantly. I think touchscreen could be best used as a step above joysticks, when an action cannot just be summed by a on/off (or +/-) state, or a vector in one direction. Imagine in a military setting if you need to open a communication channel with 4 teams moving close to each other to warn them of a nearby enemy. Would you prefer to switch the “open communication” lever, check the team numbers, push the buttons 1, 5, 6, 12 and the “open channel” button. Or circle them directly on the map and click “open communication” on the right side panel? I also think that a lot of touchscreen interface are immature and ill thought, but it would be the same issue with stupid buttons like we can find in so many cars for instance (why would the parking brake switch be next to the A/C on/off ?)
        • other_herbert 7y ago
          I think you just talked me into making some sort of huge steampunk button controller for slack... Have a label with the contact name, an incandescent lamp for new message status then a button to chose that to go to the conversation... Hmmm now all I need to find is some time
  • jhayward 7y ago
    I agree, and would add that a case where the UI is evolving and you want to be able to ship functional updates and changes easily is another 'use a touch screen' indicator.
  • enobrev 7y ago
    This is a pretty old complaint, but my initial issues about the ipod, especially 2nd and 3rd gen was the lack of manual controls. At a younger age, a walkman or discman in my pocket with headphones in my ears was a constant, and I was able to find my way through whatever media was in there quickly and easily by thumb. With the iPod, I could manage sometimes but about half the time I ended up having to take it out and look at what i pressed because it just wasn't working by feel. I remember a couple mp3 players from the time made manual buttons with different sizes and placement and better feedback, but they weren't around for long.
    • nitrogen 7y ago
      This seems unfortunately common across all industries. People focus on visual appeal only to the detriment of all other senses. Fruit gets larger and brighter, but the flavor and texture go down. Acoustic paneled ceilings are removed in favor of exposed ductwork and beams, but noise transmission between floors and echoes on the same floor get much worse. (I am torn about this one though) Buttons with tactile guidance feel great but look too 1990s so everything becomes a glass rectangle. I would really really like to see and participate in a renaissance of design that accounts for all of the human senses in all their forms.
  • Tomte 7y ago
    Or if you need to clean/desinfect often. Touchscreens are good in hospitals.
    • logfromblammo 7y ago
      Hospitals could also use hand controls made of metal with a high copper or silver content, or foot pedals. Maybe also autoclave-able interface boards, or disposable single-use plastic covers. Too many medical devices are designed to be operated by fingers, rather than a foot. Touchscreens help the problem of hand-transferred contamination, but that is the wrong problem to fix. The problem is that hands are being forced to touch things unnecessarily. No one cares about what feet touch, because feet don't touch patients, and shoe-clad feet can step through a shallow disinfecting bath if necessary.
  • Kapura 7y ago
    This is absolutely correct. Humans are physical creatures living in a physical world and our brains have evolved to interact with that world in a physical way. Touch-screen interfaces, even good ones, necessitate a level of mental abstraction, which is going to make operating in a fatigued state even more difficult.
    • qrbLPHiKpiux 7y ago
      To add, we're analog creatures. For a human to interface with anything digital, we need to drop what we’re doing and fully engage the touch interface. Dangerous when driving, or similar. With analog interfaces, our hands know exactly where to go and what to do just on feel, keeping attention elsewhere. I’m glad the DOD made this decision and I hope others will follow. Just because you can chip it doesn’t mean you should.
      • SilasX 7y ago
        Heh, I just had a vision of some car manufacturer making the steering controlled by a touch screen. (Is there a reason that that would already be illegal?)
        • userbinator 7y ago
          Is there a reason that that would already be illegal? The FMVSS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Motor_Vehicle_Safety_Standards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Motor_Vehicle_Safety_S... ) probably has some rule that states a car has to have a physical steering wheel that operates in a particular way, as well as a brake pedal to the left of the accelerator, etc., although I haven't actually looked; I do know, however, that it requires automatic transmissions to have the PRNDL shift sequence.
  • dustingetz 7y ago
    Google Maps
  • elboru 7y ago
    Then we have the “touch buttons”, which doesn’t have any of the benefits of touchscreens (mutability) nor the benefits of regular buttons (touch feedback).
    • lucb1e 7y ago
      I agree, but isn't one (tiny, almost never worth it) benefit that it is not a mechanically moving part? Shouldn't it last longer?
  • smacktoward 7y ago
    > i.e. doesn't need to morph into a different and back again The UX terminology for what you're describing is a modal interface: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_(user_interface) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_(user_interface) ... which is to say, an interface that works differently depending on what "mode" the interface is in. A classic example of a modal interface is vi/vim, where you have to explicitly switch into "editing" mode in order to actually insert text into the document. And a classic demonstration of why modal interfaces are undesirable can be produced simply by taking someone who's never used vi/vim before, sitting them down in front of it, and telling them to enter a line of text. They will start typing, and immediately become confused when the words they typed don't actually show up anywhere. (Or worse, when they happen to have typed a keystroke that corresponds to a vi command and weird stuff they didn't expect starts happening.) As you note, modal interfaces are particularly bad in situations where the user needs to operate the system under pressure -- such as (say) on a warship, where the life of the operator may literally depend on them being able to accomplish tasks quickly and accurately. Modal interfaces force the operator to first orient themselves as to what mode the system is currently in before they can do anything, which slows down even experienced operators, and pull away attention that could otherwise be applied elsewhere. What does all that have to do with touchscreens? Because how a touchscreen operates can be modified with only some programming, they tend to lure developers into building modal interfaces in an effort to cram as many features into them as possible. From a feature-checklist perspective that's great, but from a usability perspective it's a disaster. Anyone who's experienced a modern car infotainment system will understand why -- paging through menu screens to find the one mode with the feature you want while piloting a two-ton hunk of metal at 75mph is a bad combination.
    • bagacrap 7y ago
      I don't think you can call modal interfaces inherently bad. I suppose Gmail is a modal interface because if you pull it up and start typing you'll be issuing commands instead of composing an email, until you enter "composition" mode. But what is the alternative? Have every button on the keyboard do the exact same thing regardless of what application or part of an application is currently in use? It's fine if you don't like vim but you don't have to pitch it as an objective universal truth that emacs > vim.
  • mcswell 7y ago
    My Prius has manual controls for the A/C, but I get confused anyway...and, I think, for good reason. What I have: There's one button that toggles A/C on/off; when it's on, a green LED glows in the button (the button is flush at all times). There's an up/down lever that increases/ decreases the fan speed: hold it up, and the fan speed increases by a notch every second or two, and similarly for down. When you let go, the lever reverts to the middle position. The fan speed shows in a series of bars in a tiny display above that switch. There's another up/down lever that controls the temp setting, although exactly what that does depends on whether the A/C is on (I think). Its current setting shows as numbers above that switch. There's another controller that determines whether the air goes to the front seat only, or the front + back; the setting for that appears on the main console screen, but only for a few seconds after you change it--after that, the main console reverts to showing engine status or something, depending on how that's set. Whether it goes to the driver only, or to the driver + front seat passenger, is determined by whether the car thinks there's a passenger (which it determines by weight on the seat). There are two other controls that determine whether the defrosters are on; I can't remember how you tell what they're set for. What I wish: two knobs to control temp and fan settings; clockwise would be higher/ faster. A lever to determine air to the front/back seats. A toggle switch to turn the A/C on/off; up is on. Toggle switches for the front/rear defrosters. What I'm glad I don't have: touch screen controls for all this.
• crb002 7y ago
  Duh. Especially if an EMP hit.
  • Kuinox 7y ago
    If an EMP hit, the ship will just cease to function. There is electronics everywhere.
  • situational87 7y ago
    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.
    • jodrellblank 7y ago
      the theoretical EMP that has never happened https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_storm_of_1859 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]
      • jhayward 7y ago
        A geomagnetic storm is not an EMP. They are completely different phenomena. A geomagnetic storm is a very long duration, low frequency event that causes movement in the magnetic field of the earth. This can induce a voltage on large conductive structures notably very large metal objects, but primarily on long distance electrical lines such as telegraph (in 1859), or electrical transmission lines today. An EMP is an incredibly high-frequency, short-duration event in which a very intense electric field is generated which can affect mostly very small electrical devices such as integrated circuits, etc. They aren't even vaguely similar.
• situational87 7y ago
  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 where it's needed most. I can't imagine a worse solution than a bunch of poorly designed, unintuitive screens being transferred all over the ship in a chaotic situation.
  • newnewpdro 7y ago
    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 helm and didn't want the throttle at my command as well.
    • adatavizguy 7y ago
      > 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.
    • VBprogrammer 7y ago
      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.
• gorbot 7y ago
  Man for something like the main controls you would expect it to be manual. Picture Boeing moving plane controls to touchscreen - I thing it would be disastrous. I bet the navy had contractors up selling touchscreen tech like crazy. So many more points of failure for touchscreens it seems crazy
  • hrktb 7y ago
    At this point is “manual” even accurate, as these controls are gradually not linked to anything ? (thus allowing to move control around, or input adjustement for instance) Also (from 2016): http://www.boeing.com/777x/reveal/touchscreens-come-to-777x-flight-deck/ http://www.boeing.com/777x/reveal/touchscreens-come-to-777x-...
• c-smile 7y ago
  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.
• heelix 7y ago
  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.
  • a3n 7y ago
    Rough roads too.
    • lucb1e 7y ago
      Oh boy, driving through the shit town of Haaren by bus while trying to text my girlfriend I'll be there in 10. I miss my Nokia 6230i or E75 so much during those times. I don't get why nobody made an E75-style phone with Android, I look for it every time I need a new phone but there is never anything reasonable.
      • megaremote 7y ago
        They do make them. People keep pretending they don't exist without even looking for them.
        • dredmorbius 7y ago
          Examples?
• dmix 7y ago
  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.
  • inflatableDodo 7y ago
    >We still use controllers for video games over keyboards/mice Not that good an example, at least for first person shooters.
    • dmix 7y ago
      I'm sure the vast majority of FPS players are using controllers...
      • greedo 7y ago
        Most highly skilled FPS players are using mice/keyboard. In games where both console and PC are supported, PC players usually have far higher mechanical skills due to the greater controllability enabled by mouse/keyboard. Watch the OWL, and half the maneuvers that players make are simply impossible to do with a game controller.
        • dmix 7y ago
          What's your point? Anyone who's played video games is well aware that value of both in different contexts. Which is my point about it not being a panacea... It's not about the value of mice/keyboards vs controllers in gaming but about designing the best interfaces for the use-case. I doubt when the Navy designs their systems that they're trying to mimic professional gamers who needs 99.9% aiming accuracy and extremely fast response times in a simulated environment. Typically you design it for the average person, with the least amount of complexity.
          • greedo 7y ago
• Quequau 7y ago
  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.
  • flowless 7y ago
    LinuxCNC (at least Axis) can be controlled by keyboard - F1 is especially handy to stop the job in progress if anything goes wrong. Arrow keys can be used for jogging, with shift it uses max travel speeds but dedicated CNC pendant for jogging is on my TODO list as well as standalone DRO with 7 segment displays.
    • Quequau 7y ago
      I absolutely hate using a standard computer keyboard to control a machine tool. It's all wrong. Or maybe it's more accurate to say that my mind is in completely the wrong mode of thought. Anyway it just doesn't jive. So far I've tried a few pendants, starting with a games controller, some kind of media production controller, and some off-shore low budget purpose made dedicated CNC pendant. The games controller was by far the most useable but it's made out of the wrong materials, made for childrens' hands, and doesn't have all the right mechanical inputs (I need a wheel). The media thing was unsatisfying but tantalising in some ways. I've been psyching myself up for a doing some sort of mostly faithful copy of legit OEM controllers I use from time to time, like Fanuc for example. Some years ago I used an old Maho that had a really nice wired pendant. It was really solid, had some heft to it, and my recollection is that failing one or two functions had every one might want in such a device. Also, I think you're right about wanting a standalone DRO with 7 segment LED displays. For a lot of jobs I find that a DRO hits the sweet spot with being easy to use, easy to read, and having the functions I need. My only real complaint is that I think I want one with a larger read out, so I can push it well out of the way and still see it properly.
• achow 7y ago
  In a related news: Mazda is purging touchscreens from its vehicles https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1121372_why-mazda-is-purging-touchscreens-from-its-vehicles https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1121372_why-mazda-is-pur... Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20200335 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20200335
• vortico 7y ago
  Hardware electronic musicians understand this well. :)
• everybodyknows 7y ago
  >That setting meant that any crew member at another station could take over steering operations, and when the crew tried to regain control of the ship from multiple stations, control “shifted from the lee helm, to aft steering, to the helm, and back to aft steering.” There's some parallel here to Air France 447, where crew fed opposing inputs to flight controls, with reportedly zero tactile feedback, as it pancaked into the ocean. >https://news.aviation-safety.net/2012/07/09/bea-issues-final-report-on-af447-accident/ https://news.aviation-safety.net/2012/07/09/bea-issues-final...
• coldtea 7y ago
  Tactile is better. That's also the lesson electronic musicians found out over time. You can still use MIDI/VST/synthesizers/DAWs and so on -- but having tactile control over them is better (faster and more expressive) than a tiny, or even a large, screen. And of course, you can combine both methods (but not when you're just given a screen).
  • walshemj 7y ago
    Which is why you have such a wide range of physical controllers for DAWS.
  • OrgNet 7y ago
    I also still prefer a slide out keyboard on my phone... and I don't care if it's twice as thick
• meddlepal 7y ago
  > and that many were fatigued, with an average of 4.9 hours of sleep between the 14 crew members present. I suspect this played more of a role than any of the controls or procedures did. I had a friend in the Navy and he once explained the shifts he did to me and how utterly insane they were. I suspect leadership doesn't want to (or cant) fix the root cause (fatigue) and is happy to spend tax dollars to replace the steering and divert attention from the problem for now. Gotta do something! Anything! Even if it's not the right thing.
  • wolf550e 7y ago
    We have an example of how navy shifts work on HN by 'genkimind: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19101464 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19101464
    • deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  • mrweasel 7y ago
    I'm not going to argue that the navy should be allow insane schedule, if it's due to budget or poor planing, but in case of a real war maybe you can't expect the grew to get a full 8 hour sleep. A warship need to be able to operate under the worst of circumstances. In that case every move you make needs to be reflex, and I can imagine that touchscreens aren't ideal for quick precise motions, done by reflex, after only 4 hours of sleep.
    • hanniabu 7y ago
      This would totally be understandable and every expected if this lack of sleep were part of stress weeks meant to mentality prepare you for real world operation conditions, but I take it from the parent comment that it seems it's part of normal operating procedure, which is detrimental.
    • bsder 7y ago
      > but in case of a real war maybe you can't expect the grew to get a full 8 hour sleep. True, but even Navy Seals don't run sleep deprived continuously. In between those training times when they are sleep deprived, they are expected to have normal sleep cycles.
• buboard 7y ago
  certain car manufacturers should do the same too
• olliej 7y ago
  Seriously touchscreens are so bad for most controls, it irks me that they’re so gratuitously over used
• wintorez 7y ago
  Same thing Happened in Honda CR-V. They removed the volume knob, and people had to use touchscreen; there was a huge backlash, so they brought back the physical volume knob.
• cletus 7y ago
  Great. If only monitor manufacturers would do the same thing. I have a monitor with exactly 2 inputs (1 DP, 1 HDMI). What do I need to do to switch between them? 1. Press the Menu button 2. Move the option to Input Source 3. Select Input Source 4. Move from one to the other 5. Press Select Some monitor will compress 1-3 into a single Input Source option. Still, 3 presses? Why does literally NO ONE make a monitor with hardware input source buttons? WHY? I HATE OSD menus. With a passion. I don't care if it's a few cents cheaper. They are literally AWFUL. Just look at the Macbook touch bar and how much it's generally reviled.
  • TaylorAlexander 7y ago
    I really believe we would be better off if every piece of technology we used was open source. All the display manufacturers really want is to make displays. Making the OSD doesn’t have to be their doing, and an open source community could build a common interface with some basic button requirements. We could maintain a list of supported manufacturers and before long you know to avoid devices that don’t support it. This doesn’t happy because open source is uncommon in non-software industries, but I truly believe no one is maintaining any competitive advantage with their proprietary OSD. They could share their source with, I believe, no negative impact on competition. In fact the industry would be healthier because consumer friction would be lower.
    • sitkack 7y ago
      This is a great idea. Or make monitors have a USB device profile, or just use the serial profile and have a command response protocol (http rest) for query and setting configuration. Standardize this protocol. Now all displays could be configured using external standardized logic. I'd prefer something over SPI, but either is really ok.
      • PrototypeNM1 7y ago
        DDC/CI?
  • reilly3000 7y ago
• Animats 7y ago
  A key issue for the Navy is that they have multiple stations which can control steering and propulsion, and they are not tied together with force feedback. There's at least one airplane crash of an Airbus that came from that situation, and a crash between a ferry and a NYC dock for the same reason. What the Navy is looking for is available off the shelf. Force and position feedback ship throttles are available.[1] Move one lever and all the other ones move to match. [1] https://www.kongsberg.com/globalassets/maritime/km-products/product-documents/k-thrust-azimuth-lever https://www.kongsberg.com/globalassets/maritime/km-products/...
• reilly3000 7y ago
  The very idea of a touchscreen on a ship is mindboggling, at least to a landlubber. Ships are on oceans. Oceans are kinda famous for making things tip around, as are torpedoes, collisions, and such. I can't fathom trying to press the CORRECT area on a touchscreen during a critical situation when I may have just been abruptly knocked aside moments earlier.
• joemaller1 7y ago
  If the controls were exclusively gaming mice/keyboards and Xbox/PlayStation controllers, they'd be the most agile, fearsome fleet in history.
  • swagasaurus-rex 7y ago
    Guitar hero guitars and rock band drums. Really, we should be hiring twitch streamers to pilot these multimillion dollar vessels.
  • Rebelgecko 7y ago
    The Navy has tested using Xbox controllers for controlling periscopes. It's saves tens of thousands of dollars each over the fancy custom joysticks they used to use. If one breaks, it's easy to replace. It also helps a lot for training--the old ones took a few hours of training to get new users comfortable, but since a lot of the users are dudes in their 20s and 30s the Xbox controller is a lot more intuitive
• yarrel 7y ago
  This is why the Enterprise has buttons and sliders as its controls rather than immersive holographic displays.
• transfire 7y ago
  Awesome... they can replace the mechanical controls with oars the next there's an accident!
• sneak 7y ago
  In somewhat related news, I am kicking around the idea of a modular hardware project to be able to add physical knobs, buttons, and switches to a computer interface, sort of how those magnetic modular midi controllers work, but for more than just MIDI, and with a wider range of input types and a spec for a frame/rack/bus so that you can screw them together (sort of like a modular synth, but probably with landscape orientation instead of portrait) into a console panel. I want my computer to have a lot more backlit LCD 2x16 dot matrix displays and blinky lights and heavy metal clunk switches and good knobs. Email me if you have ideas or feedback or want to get involved.
• exabrial 7y ago
  I greatly dislike touch screens in vehicles for the same reason. Still can't believe they are allowed
• cfv 7y ago
  What even was the point of putting them there in the first place? It's a freaking gunboat. You want this things to have a single clear mode of operation. You're using this to kill people, not play games. Clarity and intent of use are paramount here, over sweet transitions and looks
• mensetmanusman 7y ago
  Touch screens are amazing interfaces for interacting with zoom/rotation of multi-scale data (maps / 3D space / molecules / etc.). Buttons are amazing interfaces for changing a single state of a machine.
• mncharity 7y ago
  Let's picture a mechanical throttle, with force feedback to indicate conflicting inputs, and self positioning to indicate current settings. Spiffy! The interest in this thread is understandable. Except this is 7th fleet, so operational tempo and deferred maintenance means those new throttles will be variously broken. So now absence of force sometimes means no conflict, and sometimes doesn't. And position sometimes indicates setting, and sometimes doesn't. You just need to keep track of what maintenance state each throttle of each pair is in. But don't worry, mechanical inputs for continuous variables reduces cognitive load. And maybe instead of a mechanically complex positioner, we'll put a more reliable indicator next to the throttle. I know, it could be screen. Or even better, let's have both! And ... oh, never mind. Just two observations. First, apropos unilateral transfer of control. "In addition to the coordinated procedure, a unilateral procedure, in which one station could take control of thrust from another station by action of only one station, was also available. However, the unilateral procedure is not relevant to the accident and will not be discussed further in this report." Page 6 (pdf's 16). "Considering the speed and timing of the control transfer, the NTSB concludes that the unintended shift in steering control from the helm to the lee helm station on the John S McCain was likely a unilateral transfer initiated from the lee helm station. [...] and contributed to the errors that led to the accident." Page 26 (36). Reflected in Findings 7 and 8. Second, apropos the big red button. "According to the John S McCain’s emergency procedures and other written directives, the helmsman’s first action in response to a loss of steering was to press the emergency-override-to-manual button. This action would have shifted steering to the helm station in the backup manual mode. However, the helmsman told investigators that, during the accident, he did not press the emergency-override-to-manual button because he believed that this sent steering control to aft steering (an opinion shared by other bridge watch standers interviewed by investigators)" It seems the accident might have been avoided if the single big red button in the middle of the console, ambiguously labeled "EMERGENCY OVERRIDE TO MANUAL", had been sharpied with "Get manual helm control".
• Justsignedup 7y ago
  Wait. Let me get this straight. Touchscreens, which are ideal for representing multiple user unterfaces in an intuitive way, but requiring constant visual contact are being replaced by a physical user interface that can be used by both touch, and memory? Why was touchscreen ever even a consideration for controls you're not looking at? Touchscreen is great for phones. It is awful for keyboards (see macbook pro). And if is even more awful for controls. Has nobody researched this before spending a few hundred million dollars?
  • ChuckMcM 7y ago
    Touch screens have a cheaper cost per command input and more easily changed. Further, you can reconfigure the controls on the screen based on use to achieve way more controls than would fit in a similar amount of space. As pointed out in the article, this is not good human factors process when the key set of command options are fixed and unlikely to change. And that hard controls for similar functions across equipment gives better cost savings in human training time than the "soft" controls give at acquisition time. I do think military acquisition folks can "fall in love" with "sci fi" interfaces but there has been a ton of excellent research at NASA Ames which disputes the utility of such interfaces.
  • azernik 7y ago
    They were useful because they can be reconfigured on-demand to different interfaces - e.g. you can route helmsman's responsibilities to a different bridge station in case of hardware damage or human casualties.
    • vvillena 7y ago
      That's also possible with a common set of hardware controller devices. Just like multiple games are played with the same controller on a console, or the way we use personal computers with a keyboard and mouse.
    • atoav 7y ago
      As someone who designs ans builds modular synthesizer modules: so can mechanical interfaces if designed appropriately. Add labels on the display and use a set of generic controls and boom, you can use the same hardware for a ton of functions given the right abstractions.
• frobozz 7y ago
  How does one operate a touch screen when wearing anti-flash gear?
• mxscho 7y ago
  This looks like a great step in the right direction and I hope the manufacturer of my coffee machine is following suit.
  • PunchTornado 7y ago
    hmm, I like the coffee machine at the office to have touch screen. They have literally 30 types of coffees there, I prefer quick searching and selecting my stuff. + with touchscreen you can bookmark your specific drink with the right amount of sugar and milk and then get it every time at the touch of a button.
    • mxscho 7y ago
      We also have these big coffee machines at work and they're very cool because when you're walking to a different one it's kind of random which mix of products you'll get offered just because there are so many drinks and each one is programmed differently. And I agree that it makes sense for these types of machines. But my personal one has literally two options to choose from. However, the touch screen is old technology in contrast to the machine itself, so the handling is rather awkward. Also, it had to be replaced already because it suddenly stopped working for no actual reason. I think that the logic behind not just putting two physical buttons on it is that some designer thought it looks cooler with this big screen full of colors - and he may be right, but UX should really be more than just looks.
      • PunchTornado 7y ago
        yes, I agree. I think the UX should always start with physical buttons and if they find that the buttons are too many to fit on the device in an intuitive way, then adopt the touchscreen.
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• TuLithu 7y ago
  Good choice. I HATE touch screens. Humans need tactile feedback.
• almog 7y ago
  "Fun" touchscreen story - I had to file a warranty claim for my not so cheap blender that had mechanical controls. The company replaced it with the newer model, that had, you guessed it - touchscreen control. Not long after that, I was working in the kitchen, moving stuff into the blender, when a drop of water made it to the screen. The thing started at full speed throwing liquid everywhere, which worsened the situation, leaving me no way to stop it but to pull the cord out. If I had to guess the next touchscreen everywhere will be misuse of AI, not in a malicious way, but in a really stupid one.
  • pandapower2 7y ago
    >If I had to guess the next touchscreen everywhere will be misuse of AI, not in a malicious way, but in a really stupid one. Reminds me of a talk someone gave. I forget who. Elon Musk perhaps. A quick google didn't turn it up. Anyhow, they laid out a hypothetical scenario where humans were driven to extinction by a run away AI. Rather than being some sort of Skynet scenario where the machines are explicitly trying to kill all humans, it is an AI whose job was to maximize strawberry production. The AI converted the earth's entire surface into strawberry fields and inadvertently wiped out everything else in the process. Arguably a more plausible scenario than Skynet.
    • freerobby 7y ago
      That talk is a spin on Nick Bostrom's Paperclip Maximizer. See: https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Paperclip_maximizer https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Paperclip_maximizer
    • yyx 7y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_convergence#Paperclip_maximizer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_convergence#Paper...
    • iofiiiiiiiii 7y ago
      The Revelation Space book series by Alastair Reynolds [spoilers ahead] ends with such a paperclip maximizer scenario. Someone accidentally turns on advanced sentient self-replicating terraforming robots without programming their target area. They promptly begin to terraform the galaxy and don't take kindly to interference. This is a tiny shade of background in the story, not the main story, but read the books if you like this kind of tale.
• blazespin 7y ago
  Same thing happened in Ford Flex (perhaps other cars as well, I just have a ford flex). The touchscreen was replaced with mechanical dials and buttons in newer models for climate control. I understand, I find the touchscreen hard to use while concentrating on the road. That said, touchscreens definitely have their place for getting information about the system / monitoring / managing data.
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• HocusLocus 7y ago
  I am a computer person, and I am falling onto my knees with tearful thanks for the wisdom of this. We have barely escaped really-stupid but we're not out of the woods yet.
• einpoklum 7y ago
  Oh, well, I must say - I'm touched that they got that problem under control.
• ggm 7y ago
  And in related news, Kindle now charges more for a top-end unit which exposes physical page-turn buttons in place (or alongside) screen touch interactions: Its not just more functional, you can charge more for it
• cryptozeus 7y ago
  “The report says that while fatigue and lack of training played a role in the accident, the design of the ship’s control console were also contributing factors” I hope this is not just a scapegoat and actual issue is being fixed.
• throwaway3627 7y ago
  Hey Skippy, don't get any water or coffee on the helm controls, or it might either not respond or go full ahead/reverse. ^-- Just one class of examples of what could wrong with not having physical controls. Also, it takes a smaller explosive to crack/damage a touchscreen than physical controls into uncontrollability... and now you have a billion dollar paperweight.
• thanatos_dem 7y ago
  Somewhat related - when I was working at Union Pacific in 2011, there was a hugely expensive effort to replace the old 1024x768 monitors in the locomotives with 1080p equivalents, including redesigning a lot of the UIs to work in a wide screen form factor. After the rollout completed, all the feedback was negative, saying that the fonts were too small to read on the new displays, especially when the locomotive began vibrating at speed. In the end, the whole fleet had a software update pushed out that set the resolution back to 1024x760, and all the UIs looked stretched. The engineers (train, not software) were ecstatic. Lesson to take away is that with user interaction, it’s important to look at how humans will actually be using the system. That seems self evident, but given stories like these clearly isn’t.
• m3kw9 7y ago
  Sense of touch is underused as an aspect of interface design. See Apple Watch’s crown dial.
• chrisbrandow 7y ago
  I look forward to this outbreak of common sense to return to car interfaces.
• acd 7y ago
  If you have physically controls then you will get haptic touch feedback and develop muscle memory. Physical controls is similar to playing the guitar you need the feedback and sensitivity of the touch thing. Touch screens is good for certain areas. Displaying information. Ferries have had similar incidents crash with dock, with touch controls. A reason aircraft have gps with knobs, bmw has roll wheel to control the infotainment selection etc.
• KuhlMensch 7y ago
  Its pretty simple to work out if the touchscreens were a step-back: ask the operators. BACK-DROP: Many commentators blame the USS Fitzgerald squarely at the feet of budgetary uncertainty, leading to severely depleted crews. Researching it now, the coverage I think must of been largely by this guy https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/aqmwam/im_t_christian_miller_a_journalist_who/ https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/aqmwam/im_t_christian...
• bumby 7y ago
  This is interesting in the context of the SpaceX capsule design that heavily relies on touchscreens: "The cockpit simulator demonstrated the controls that Dragon astronauts will have at their command. In comparison to the space shuttle and its more than 1,000 buttons, switches, and controls, the Dragon capsule has a modest array of three flat screens and two rows of buttons below." [1] It seems like space travel would be less resilient to the growing pains of naval travel when implementing new tech, but hopefully they get the HMI issues all worked out beforehand. [1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/08/spacex-reveals-the-controls-of-its-dragon-spacecraft-for-the-first-time/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/08/spacex-reveals-the-c...
  • SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
    The culture at NASA traditionally was to allow the occupants of any craft to have complete control over everything[1], even though it was technically possible to pilot entire missions remotely (as many unmanned missions over the years have proven). I'm assuming SpaceX doesn't have such a culture. [1] Digital Apollo is a very interesting book on the subject: https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/digital-apollo https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/digital-apollo
• stevec2222 7y ago
  I think this is actually a smart decision. Thinking about it from a systems engineering perspective might help. I spent a few years writing software for NAVAIR. I worked specifically with systems that are on carriers, but I assume it is the same for NAVSEA and destroyers. A touchscreen might be thought of as a COTs component, but there's not many choices when you take into account the mil spec standards that must be met with regards to vibration and salt water. The touchscreens that are allowed to be used are not cheap and if the display breaks, it must all be replaced. The whole monitor itself is the smallest replaceable unit. Physical buttons on the other hand have very cheap versions that have been passing mil spec for the last half century. Stocking LED buttons and non touch screen displays would be the cheapest option.
• TrevorJ 7y ago
  I took a cheap MIDI controller and wrote some software to control Photoshop with it so that I can use dials for brush size, zoom, etc. Feels so much more natural.
• zepearl 7y ago
  Just yesterday I downloaded a couple of kind-of-documentary-videos from Youtube about submarines, for example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwTS3FYGhOc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwTS3FYGhOc (the doc itself is not great but the resolution/detail of the video is good). I was astonished to see that they have screens (touchscreens?) everywhere! I was naive in this area and thought that at least submarines would rather have physical switches or at most something similar to the screens of jet fighters (e.g. http://falcon4.wdfiles.com/local--files/avionics%3Amfd/mfd_menu.JPG http://falcon4.wdfiles.com/local--files/avionics%3Amfd/mfd_m... ) where any switch/option/selection is displayed at the border of the screen and mapped to a physical button on its rim, but that's apparently not the case. I thought so because I thought that whoever uses the controls would like to have a physical feedback about switching a switch/button especially in a critical/stressful situation - but maybe they still get some kind of feedback (e.g. some external sound or vibration?)?
• SQL2219 7y ago
  Touch screens in cars should burn in hell.
• shrimpx 7y ago
  Who is/are the idiot/s who thought it appropriate to use touch screens to begin with? How much taxpayer money waste has this decision and its undoing caused, and is there any effort whatsoever to get to the bottom of this? Or is this just "collateral damage"?
• hello_tyler 7y ago
  Touchscreens seem like it was overly ambitious to implement in the first place. Not to mention prone to attack by an EMP, or even literal sticky fingers (heh) but I bet a lot of other stuff on the ships are too. Navy may bumble around a tiny bit but I really like my GPS.