7 ms·
There are some good reasons that NASA has avoided touchscreens, besides the ones pointed out here: * Things tend to get loose in microgravity. You don't really
by danepowell 12y ago
There are some good reasons that NASA has avoided touchscreens, besides the ones pointed out here:
* Things tend to get loose in microgravity. You don't really want things floating into a touchscreen and performing unintended actions.
* During ascent and descent, it's incredibly hard (potentially impossible) to hold your hands out in front of you to operate something like that. The Orion has hand controllers next to each seat, which are notably lacking here.
- SEJeff 12y agoSurely they would not be using a resistive touch screen for a dragon capsule? A modern (or enhanced) capacitive touch screen requires something like a human finger to act as a conductor for operation. That is how every modern smartphone and tablet work and why they suck with gloves on.
- _djo_ 12y agoAn approach used in some experimental aircraft touchscreens is to combine resistive and capacitative approaches, almost like the old BlackBerry Storm. You need to press down with a certain level of force to get the screen to register the click, but it won't be triggered by random objects.
- MPSimmons 12y agoThese screens don't look like those screens, though. These look like capacitive touch screens on 27in monitors.
- _djo_ 12y agoIt's not easy to see just from looking at the displays. They may also have incorporated some sort of software-based delay, requiring the user to press down for a certain amount of time before a click is registered. I doubt that SpaceX has not considered the implications of touch screens in space ships.
- SEJeff 12y agoMy recollection was that most people also hated the storm's touchscreen and that made it a pretty big flop.
- _djo_ 12y agoIt's a horrible solution for a smartphone touchscreen and the Storm had no other redeeming features. The needs in a cockpit are rather different, obviously.