4 ms·

Probably because it is 10 year old older hardware but thoroughly tested. Using Chrome/JS/CSS on the latest Ryzen might be neat but when you need to transport 3

Probably because it is 10 year old older hardware but thoroughly tested. Using Chrome/JS/CSS on the latest Ryzen might be neat but when you need to transport 300 passengers daily around there is other sort of concerns then taking up 3 folks to the ISS every 6 months.

rbanffy 5y ago
It was certified as testes, so the lag has been there for the whole 10 years.
- sslayer 5y ago
  Dependability and reliability override responsiveness
  - netr0ute 5y ago
    Ironic, because responsiveness might inherently make it undependable because if you really needed to know where you are right now, that multiple-second delay isn't going to help.
    - p_l 5y ago
      Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, in this order. And the map isn't even part of the primary navigation method, plus with multi pilot crew usually you can offload slower, less time critical tasks to copilot.
jeltz 5y ago
That is no excuse. It was possible to create almost instantly responsive UIs more than 20 years ago.
- qayxc 5y ago
  Since we don't know anything about the internals, it's safe to say the goal was "good enough and certified" vs. "snappy but no guarantees it works correctly 100% of the time". This is an airplane after all, not a consumer-grade gadget.
  - paavohtl 5y ago
    They might have different standards and I'm not a pilot, but in my opinion having multiple seconds of UI lag in vitally important interfaces is not good enough nor deserves certification.
    - p_l 5y ago
      it's not considered vitally important interface, that's probably even the reason for the lag - higher priority tasks preempting it.
      - justsid 5y ago
        This. The PFD and ND, the displays showing actually important data like the plane attitude, altitude and also another map responds immediately to changes. But the map shown in the video just isn’t safety critical and simply doesn’t matter in the worst case.
    - xnyan 5y ago
      The safety record for commercial airlines is extremely good per mile traveled as compared to pretty much any other form of powered transportation. At some level I share your concerns about UI lag, but it would seem not to negatively affect safety of flights in any detectable way.
    - curryst 5y ago
      Some of that may be due to redundant devices. You're waiting for at least 2 devices to return a reading, and probably a third thing that handles reconciling the results. The speed of this thing doesn't seem particularly vital either. Everything of interest in a split second scenario is already on-screen; just looking at their speed, it would you a comparatively long time to get off the edge of the map. If you have time to get off the edge of the map, you have time to wait a couple seconds for the page to load. If you don't have time to get off the edge of the map, there's not really a reason to fidget with it. I agree, it seems annoying, but it doesn't ultimately seem dangerous. I can't think of a situation where you a) need to change the screen, and b) don't have time to wait for the UI to update. And I would much rather have 2 seconds of UI lag to get a known correct response than milli/nano seconds of lag to get a probably correct response. Most of us exist in a world where the response time is more important than absolute correctness.
- teddyc 5y ago
  Agree. I supported a DOS based touchscreen Point of Sale (POS) with technology from decades ago and it was fast AF. You only got 256 colors and the fonts didn't look that great. But it was a speed demon.
demarq 5y ago
spacex already disproved this myth have a look at the last manned mission they did. Glorious touch screen displays with all the bells and whistles.
- alistairSH 5y ago
  SpaceX's crewed capsule is 5-10 years newer than the A350. I imagine SpaceX has a different set of certification requirements (ie Airbus has stronger financial incentives to use existing, approved designs for components).
- benhurmarcel 5y ago
  SpaceX doesn't certify to FAA/EASA, and also doesn't have to work for 30 years.
- mrweasel 5y ago
  Didn’ someone later confirm that there is in fact physical buttons below the touch screen, because you can’t actually use the touch screen with cloves on anyway.
  - crakenzak 5y ago
    the touch screens work with gloves they confirmed, the physical buttons are for backup.
mastax 5y ago
In an emergency situation, an unresponsive and unintuitive GUI may be very dangerous. Especially if pilots forget how to use it because they're using the iPad day to day but right now it's rebooting to install an update. Like, I get the argument for certification but maybe the requirements should have a minimum level of performance. If that's not possible maybe we should find a different equilibrium.
- j16sdiz 5y ago
  That's why pilot are mandated to do simulation tests every few months
- p_l 5y ago
  There are requirements for performance - appropriate to the function. The electronic flight bag interface is not used in emergencies, one of its main uses is in planning and submitting flight plans before takeoff, and it's generally not used for actively flying the plane.
  - 7952 5y ago
    Exactly. In an emergency the last thing the pilot wants to do is navigate a map interface for anything. Better to just select the alternate flight plan that was setup hours ago during flight planning.
- 7952 5y ago
  That assumes that deep navigation of a UI is necessary or desirable in an emergency. I think most of the important stuff is done with the main controls, dedicated switches, and screens/dials that are always on and ready.

rbanffy 5y ago

It was certified as testes, so the lag has been there for the whole 10 years.

sslayer 5y ago
Dependability and reliability override responsiveness
- netr0ute 5y ago
  Ironic, because responsiveness might inherently make it undependable because if you really needed to know where you are right now, that multiple-second delay isn't going to help.
  - p_l 5y ago
    Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, in this order. And the map isn't even part of the primary navigation method, plus with multi pilot crew usually you can offload slower, less time critical tasks to copilot.

jeltz 5y ago

That is no excuse. It was possible to create almost instantly responsive UIs more than 20 years ago.

qayxc 5y ago
Since we don't know anything about the internals, it's safe to say the goal was "good enough and certified" vs. "snappy but no guarantees it works correctly 100% of the time". This is an airplane after all, not a consumer-grade gadget.
- paavohtl 5y ago
  They might have different standards and I'm not a pilot, but in my opinion having multiple seconds of UI lag in vitally important interfaces is not good enough nor deserves certification.
  - p_l 5y ago
    it's not considered vitally important interface, that's probably even the reason for the lag - higher priority tasks preempting it.
    - justsid 5y ago
      This. The PFD and ND, the displays showing actually important data like the plane attitude, altitude and also another map responds immediately to changes. But the map shown in the video just isn’t safety critical and simply doesn’t matter in the worst case.
  - xnyan 5y ago
    The safety record for commercial airlines is extremely good per mile traveled as compared to pretty much any other form of powered transportation. At some level I share your concerns about UI lag, but it would seem not to negatively affect safety of flights in any detectable way.
  - curryst 5y ago
    Some of that may be due to redundant devices. You're waiting for at least 2 devices to return a reading, and probably a third thing that handles reconciling the results. The speed of this thing doesn't seem particularly vital either. Everything of interest in a split second scenario is already on-screen; just looking at their speed, it would you a comparatively long time to get off the edge of the map. If you have time to get off the edge of the map, you have time to wait a couple seconds for the page to load. If you don't have time to get off the edge of the map, there's not really a reason to fidget with it. I agree, it seems annoying, but it doesn't ultimately seem dangerous. I can't think of a situation where you a) need to change the screen, and b) don't have time to wait for the UI to update. And I would much rather have 2 seconds of UI lag to get a known correct response than milli/nano seconds of lag to get a probably correct response. Most of us exist in a world where the response time is more important than absolute correctness.
teddyc 5y ago
Agree. I supported a DOS based touchscreen Point of Sale (POS) with technology from decades ago and it was fast AF. You only got 256 colors and the fonts didn't look that great. But it was a speed demon.

demarq 5y ago

spacex already disproved this myth have a look at the last manned mission they did. Glorious touch screen displays with all the bells and whistles.

alistairSH 5y ago
SpaceX's crewed capsule is 5-10 years newer than the A350. I imagine SpaceX has a different set of certification requirements (ie Airbus has stronger financial incentives to use existing, approved designs for components).
benhurmarcel 5y ago
SpaceX doesn't certify to FAA/EASA, and also doesn't have to work for 30 years.
mrweasel 5y ago
Didn’ someone later confirm that there is in fact physical buttons below the touch screen, because you can’t actually use the touch screen with cloves on anyway.
- crakenzak 5y ago
  the touch screens work with gloves they confirmed, the physical buttons are for backup.

mastax 5y ago

In an emergency situation, an unresponsive and unintuitive GUI may be very dangerous. Especially if pilots forget how to use it because they're using the iPad day to day but right now it's rebooting to install an update. Like, I get the argument for certification but maybe the requirements should have a minimum level of performance. If that's not possible maybe we should find a different equilibrium.

j16sdiz 5y ago
That's why pilot are mandated to do simulation tests every few months
p_l 5y ago
There are requirements for performance - appropriate to the function. The electronic flight bag interface is not used in emergencies, one of its main uses is in planning and submitting flight plans before takeoff, and it's generally not used for actively flying the plane.
- 7952 5y ago
  Exactly. In an emergency the last thing the pilot wants to do is navigate a map interface for anything. Better to just select the alternate flight plan that was setup hours ago during flight planning.
7952 5y ago
That assumes that deep navigation of a UI is necessary or desirable in an emergency. I think most of the important stuff is done with the main controls, dedicated switches, and screens/dials that are always on and ready.