4 ms·

For long time I wondered why UI in spacecrafts is so inconvenient. Apollo computer UI seems to be lacking. Soyuz UI, while seems to improve over years (ha, it w

by avmich 4y ago

For long time I wondered why UI in spacecrafts is so inconvenient. Apollo computer UI seems to be lacking. Soyuz UI, while seems to improve over years (ha, it would be strange, over so many years...), still looks clunky. And then - Crew Dragon comes with touch screens. Don't they understand it's a big step back? There are benefits of "fluid" interfaces, but where is the attention to important features, ability to use "main" tools without re-learning where they are and how they look like, while having the tactile feedback?

ironmagma 4y ago
The Space Shuttle has some of the most advanced-looking UI I’ve ever seen. It’s a shame there isn’t more information about it.
bmitc 4y ago
I have been in the room, so to speak, when the design of a fusion reactor control room was being discussed. I feel the answer is simply: because engineers "design" these things. I feel like the design of spaces is simply not considered very well if at all. I get the feeling that maybe aircraft do it best? Or at least that's the impression that I have had.
- cidergal 4y ago
  Agreed. These systems tend to be designed by engineers without a lot of input from designers.
- anon7725 4y ago
  Did engineers really design the touch screens on Dragon? I feel like those were in the first mock-ups that came out. I assumed that it was just a “concept car” type detail and they would have MFDs in the real spacecraft. Touchscreens seem like a very marketing/design feature.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
fomine3 4y ago
I don't know much but driving spaceship won't need to watch outside continuously so touchscreen may make sense than car driving
- avmich 4y ago
  The idea of tactile feedback is that you can look at one place - like a screen, which gives you information in ideally most convenient way - while, without looking, operate buttons, knobs, levers etc., at the same time. If you have, for example, a screen which shows you docking crosses in the center of the picture and control buttons on the periphery of the picture, you still need to move your focus from the view to controls to operate them. This is a simplified example, just to illustrate my point.
  - otherme123 4y ago
    This can be seen in plane cookpits, where a lot of things are migrating from physical buttons to the screens. But there are still a lot of knobs, buttons, levers... Cockpit of an Airbus A380: https://i.stack.imgur.com/rLdZ3.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/rLdZ3.jpg The key seems to be to move the info to a screen, but still control the screen with physical buttons and not touching the screen. E.g. move the status display of the A/C to the central screen, but turn a knob to adjust the temperature.
midoridensha 4y ago
One big difference is that spacecraft crews actually train on their craft, just like aircraft pilots, and extensively. So they know what all the controls are for, what they do, what to do in an emergency, etc. When a pilot wants to fly a different model of airplane, they have to be retrained (or cross-trained rather) on that model, since the controls and procedures may be different. For some strange reason, people expect to just jump in the driver's seat of a car and drive away with zero training.

by avmich 4y ago

ironmagma 4y ago

The Space Shuttle has some of the most advanced-looking UI I’ve ever seen. It’s a shame there isn’t more information about it.

bmitc 4y ago

I have been in the room, so to speak, when the design of a fusion reactor control room was being discussed. I feel the answer is simply: because engineers "design" these things. I feel like the design of spaces is simply not considered very well if at all. I get the feeling that maybe aircraft do it best? Or at least that's the impression that I have had.

cidergal 4y ago
Agreed. These systems tend to be designed by engineers without a lot of input from designers.
anon7725 4y ago
Did engineers really design the touch screens on Dragon? I feel like those were in the first mock-ups that came out. I assumed that it was just a “concept car” type detail and they would have MFDs in the real spacecraft. Touchscreens seem like a very marketing/design feature.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

fomine3 4y ago

I don't know much but driving spaceship won't need to watch outside continuously so touchscreen may make sense than car driving

avmich 4y ago
The idea of tactile feedback is that you can look at one place - like a screen, which gives you information in ideally most convenient way - while, without looking, operate buttons, knobs, levers etc., at the same time. If you have, for example, a screen which shows you docking crosses in the center of the picture and control buttons on the periphery of the picture, you still need to move your focus from the view to controls to operate them. This is a simplified example, just to illustrate my point.
- otherme123 4y ago
  This can be seen in plane cookpits, where a lot of things are migrating from physical buttons to the screens. But there are still a lot of knobs, buttons, levers... Cockpit of an Airbus A380: https://i.stack.imgur.com/rLdZ3.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/rLdZ3.jpg The key seems to be to move the info to a screen, but still control the screen with physical buttons and not touching the screen. E.g. move the status display of the A/C to the central screen, but turn a knob to adjust the temperature.

midoridensha 4y ago

One big difference is that spacecraft crews actually train on their craft, just like aircraft pilots, and extensively. So they know what all the controls are for, what they do, what to do in an emergency, etc. When a pilot wants to fly a different model of airplane, they have to be retrained (or cross-trained rather) on that model, since the controls and procedures may be different. For some strange reason, people expect to just jump in the driver's seat of a car and drive away with zero training.