5 ms·

I play a lot of Digital Combat Simulator, which models a lot of these planes. At first I was interested in shooting things, then I was interested in the flying,

by snide 6y ago

I play a lot of Digital Combat Simulator, which models a lot of these planes. At first I was interested in shooting things, then I was interested in the flying, but in the end I learned I was most interested in the computer systems and how these games are mostly virtual simulations of old computers. It's fun to see what changed over the years and between cultures. The MiGs are completely different than their Western counterparts. How you navigate from point to point is often completely different. It's also interesting how durable the UX of MFDs were in cockpit design. When I went for my GA license, it was funny to see how many newer models of planes had moved to "glass" cockpits. It some ways, it felt like putting wifi on your fridge. Most of the GA planes folks fly were made in the 70s.

unoti 6y ago
Agreed! If the information in this article is even slightly interesting to you, then you owe it to yourself to spend some time with Digital Combat Simulator. In there you can get first-hand experience with the Harrier and the F/A 18 discussed in the article. You will spend a lot of time with the cockpits and start to develop your own affinity for things in the cockpit, and develop your own ideas about what you like and what you don't. Do a Google Images search for "DCS FA18 cockpit" or "DCS Harrier cockpit" and you'll see that the real life photos are pretty much indistinguishable from the screenshots, if you take the word "DCS" out of the search term. Every switch and gauge are faithfully simulated, and you can use the real-life operating manuals to operate these simulators. There's a lot of overlap with a lot of the things I love about computer systems. It's fun to learn, and to operate systems, and to feel that feeling of mastery as you gain confidence in making the machines do your bidding. Those types of feelings are much the same (and different) between operating computers and operating aircraft systems. To a large extent these modern planes feels a lot like operating a big flying computer, at least in the simulators. This is also true of things like the Cessna G1000 glass cockpit in Flight Sim 2020.
- mhh__ 6y ago
  > DCS FA18 cockpit One thing that's particularly impressive about the F/A-18 is that the Spec available in DCS (give or take a few features) is almost the same as the first batch from the 80s UI wise. In 1983, serving alongside the almost completely analog/60s F-14, the F/A-18 had 3 pretty modern MFDs. Definitely more advanced than most Star Wars cockpits, for example.
  - _carbyau_ 6y ago
    "Star wars cockpits" is an interesting comparison. I wonder at what point the Star Wars people will thematically have to update their cockpits/other tech because it will otherwise date. Kind of how CyberPunk has dated because they missed out on smartphones...
ak217 6y ago
I'm flabbergasted that MFDs haven't made more inroads in automotive and computer input device applications. We even have decent HUDs in cars now, but no MFDs. I'm convinced a good MFD would be far superior to the typical touchscreen crap - if Tesla had a MFD and a HUD instead of the giant TV screen, I would have bought one by now.
- mhh__ 6y ago
  I think it's because the MFD model is designed for trained pilots who have to take a test to use them, i.e. I'd love one, but I can just imagine the complaints about the different pages and things like that. Also, I'd love one for home automation too. There's only so much data you need to display or enter so the reduced latency of a dumb screen going straight into the back of a internet connected SBC (or even microcontroller) could be really nice to have in the kitchen, rather than having to fiddle around with either just a phone or what would end up being a tablet bolted to a wall.
  - fl0wenol 6y ago
    It was like that in mid 2000s Lexus as well. I think it's a great system... less fingerprints to clean off the panel.
- aidenn0 6y ago
  The head-unit in my Ford Focus (2004-ish?) had an MFD. Parallax was a bit of an issue (which buttons were for which function looked different from passenger and driver seat). I rate it as just "okay." The one place it was clearly better than touchscreen was for selecting the radio-station from a list of "favorites." Each station was always on the same button, so switching was simple. Note that this was for controlling the audio system only; this predates integrated "infotainment" center stacks.

by snide 6y ago

unoti 6y ago

Agreed! If the information in this article is even slightly interesting to you, then you owe it to yourself to spend some time with Digital Combat Simulator. In there you can get first-hand experience with the Harrier and the F/A 18 discussed in the article. You will spend a lot of time with the cockpits and start to develop your own affinity for things in the cockpit, and develop your own ideas about what you like and what you don't. Do a Google Images search for "DCS FA18 cockpit" or "DCS Harrier cockpit" and you'll see that the real life photos are pretty much indistinguishable from the screenshots, if you take the word "DCS" out of the search term. Every switch and gauge are faithfully simulated, and you can use the real-life operating manuals to operate these simulators. There's a lot of overlap with a lot of the things I love about computer systems. It's fun to learn, and to operate systems, and to feel that feeling of mastery as you gain confidence in making the machines do your bidding. Those types of feelings are much the same (and different) between operating computers and operating aircraft systems. To a large extent these modern planes feels a lot like operating a big flying computer, at least in the simulators. This is also true of things like the Cessna G1000 glass cockpit in Flight Sim 2020.

mhh__ 6y ago
> DCS FA18 cockpit One thing that's particularly impressive about the F/A-18 is that the Spec available in DCS (give or take a few features) is almost the same as the first batch from the 80s UI wise. In 1983, serving alongside the almost completely analog/60s F-14, the F/A-18 had 3 pretty modern MFDs. Definitely more advanced than most Star Wars cockpits, for example.
- _carbyau_ 6y ago
  "Star wars cockpits" is an interesting comparison. I wonder at what point the Star Wars people will thematically have to update their cockpits/other tech because it will otherwise date. Kind of how CyberPunk has dated because they missed out on smartphones...

ak217 6y ago

I'm flabbergasted that MFDs haven't made more inroads in automotive and computer input device applications. We even have decent HUDs in cars now, but no MFDs. I'm convinced a good MFD would be far superior to the typical touchscreen crap - if Tesla had a MFD and a HUD instead of the giant TV screen, I would have bought one by now.

mhh__ 6y ago
I think it's because the MFD model is designed for trained pilots who have to take a test to use them, i.e. I'd love one, but I can just imagine the complaints about the different pages and things like that. Also, I'd love one for home automation too. There's only so much data you need to display or enter so the reduced latency of a dumb screen going straight into the back of a internet connected SBC (or even microcontroller) could be really nice to have in the kitchen, rather than having to fiddle around with either just a phone or what would end up being a tablet bolted to a wall.
- fl0wenol 6y ago
  It was like that in mid 2000s Lexus as well. I think it's a great system... less fingerprints to clean off the panel.
aidenn0 6y ago
The head-unit in my Ford Focus (2004-ish?) had an MFD. Parallax was a bit of an issue (which buttons were for which function looked different from passenger and driver seat). I rate it as just "okay." The one place it was clearly better than touchscreen was for selecting the radio-station from a list of "favorites." Each station was always on the same button, so switching was simple. Note that this was for controlling the audio system only; this predates integrated "infotainment" center stacks.