Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Delta Testing iPads for Real-Time Communications With Pilots
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So you don't want pilots using a light, intuitive and flexible device because it doesn't seem serious enough.
Seriously given the number of those "seconds to disaster" shows that the crash is the result of bad communication or in ability to get the information. Anything that improves that situation should have our full attention.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Two pilots, two iPads. If one goes bad you still have another. Just like if one engine dies you still have another one. The required information is in memory not coming from the internet.
supermag said:
Two pilots, two iPads. If one goes bad you still have another. Just like if one engine dies you still have another one. The required information is in memory not coming from the internet.
For those asking if this is/should be built in already i can tell you (although not in the aircraft i fly) that most airline manufacturers offer this as a built in option to their new aircraft. Do a search for a pic of any new 777 cockpit from Boeing or Airbus aircraft and on both sides of the flight deck you will see screens. Both of which will do similar things as to what Delta are trying to achieve.
The problem is when you have aircraft without it and you want to retro fit a system. This is how the iPad fits in. Also we are not talking about a system which is critical to flight. Charts, weather, company documentation currently takes up a lot of weight and space on a flight deck. Now with the iPad most of this information will be stored in memory so it would not be an issue if you suddenly lost a connection and with duplication a failure of some sort would be covered. It be extremely helpful for company paperwork. In my airline this is all done by hand in flight and at the end of the day all re-entered into the computer and filed. So to be able to do this in flight or on the ground and for it then to be sent to HQ automatically it would save time and money. When you have fleets of aircraft in the hundreds small savings adds up to millions of £ or $'s.
The problem is when you have aircraft without it and you want to retro fit a system. This is how the iPad fits in. Also we are not talking about a system which is critical to flight. Charts, weather, company documentation currently takes up a lot of weight and space on a flight deck. Now with the iPad most of this information will be stored in memory so it would not be an issue if you suddenly lost a connection and with duplication a failure of some sort would be covered. It be extremely helpful for company paperwork. In my airline this is all done by hand in flight and at the end of the day all re-entered into the computer and filed. So to be able to do this in flight or on the ground and for it then to be sent to HQ automatically it would save time and money. When you have fleets of aircraft in the hundreds small savings adds up to millions of £ or $'s.
Even if it is built into the dashboard, what makes that less likely to crash than an iPad? At least the iPad is made by one of the largest software companies in the world; I'd say it's less likely to cause problems than an independently commissioned one. And if you did commission one to be absolutely fail-proof it would likely be far too expensive to be commercially attractive.
The reason the iPad is considered so revolutionary in this respect is because it has so many uses, so yes you could manufacture hardware and software tailored to your specific needs but why bother when you can spend $500 on an iPad and only worry about the very top level of the software?
I also imagine they are attracted to the iPad because it isn't built into the plane. That way (and I'm hypothesising here), pilots would be able to use it to check their flight schedule, handle communication when they're off the plane and other management systems that pilots need when they're not on the plane. I think this could be what they mean when they say "Essentially, we have only begun to identify the limitless possibilities".
And no, it's not because it has an 'i' in front of it that it seems like such a good idea; if you read the article you'll realise they're also testing Motorola Xooms.
One argument I could think of is that the iPad was designed for consumers; if it crashes, no big deal. With airplane hardware & software, it's designed to have redundant systems should something fail. If it does fail, people could lose their lives. With the iPad, all you might lose are family pictures or whatever.
Something I wonder about is how much money would the airlines save by having iPads instead of the paper maps. And if it's any reasonable amount, will the airlines pass the savings on to the consumers or pocket it and get bigger profits? My bet's on the latter. But I have a feeling it won't necessarily save that much money but just make things maybe a little safer & easier for the pilots. Don't the paper maps weigh over 10 pounds or something? Plus having instant/near instant updated data while flying.
Corporate pilots have been using EFBs since the mid 1990s.
Going for my private, I was using an EFB tablet in 2001.
If you mean having mass-approved under $500 tablets, yes that would be nice, but not sure it can happen.
Multiply that by a thousand, and you can see why it's not fun using a device that relies on a physical tether to an iTunes equipped host computer.
Hopefully that need is disappearing. (I have not kept up with all the iOS 5 and iCloud news. Feel free to update me.)
Or they might really like the ability to have live widgets, along with the visual task switcher.
You need paper backups of the charts etc.. so it is not an issue if an iPad ran out of battery. Also, this is not entirely new - quite a few private pilots (me included) already use iPad, or even iPhone based EFBs.
Silly, and iPad is NOT Winblows, Mr. Gates!
BTW, about the accident (very real
):http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=65426
Funny thing, the truck might have had saved the crew, softer then the rocks!
Obviously you are not around airplanes.
Just my $0.02 to the rest:
1. It will be used as a supplement to existing devices, not a primary device, so safety will never be compromised.
2. Pilots already bring laptops on flights, so no practical difference in application, but easier to use iPad.
3. Off The Shelf technology is generaly cheaper and better then custom made hardware for a limited purpose.
4. Military (US, but UK in particular) have adopted iPad in its training and supposedly combat action.
like others have said thats a very inaccurate and ignorant statement, pilots do actually pilot if they need to, its not all the auto pilot, and fyi Pilots only use auto land if they need to (AKA low visibility)
Edit: and im not sure you actually understand what autopilot is, it doesn't do anything more than keep the jet/plane at a predefined altitude, and keep it at a predefined speed. think cruz control for jets.
Last edited:
Well, today it can do much more then that.
About 20 years ago an airplane was able to fly an entire route from take off to landing on autopilot, the entire way.
What AP cannot do is avoid other airplanes. The air traffic control system is so antiquated the ability to keep airplanes from getting too close automatically practically does not exist, and the next generation system is years late and being underfunded (their is a proximity alert system).
Alaska Airlines issued all 1500 pilots ipads beginning a few months ago. Pretty sweet!
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2011-06-08-ipad-apple-manuals-airline_n.htm
Coop
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2011-06-08-ipad-apple-manuals-airline_n.htm
Coop
This makes Delta the third major airline to do this. Alaska was first, then United started doing it last week. Since the FAA approved iPad use for charting, even below 10,000 feet, it's really becoming a no-brainer for the airlines. An added benefit is that if any changes are made, they can simply be download to the devices instead of having to order entirely new sets of paper charts. And since iOS 5 won't require physical connections in order to sync, that potential drawback will be removed as well.
But I think what's important here is that this wasn't Apple coming to the FAA and saying "we want airlines to be able to use these in flight." Rather, this was the airlines looking at the available technology, then coming up with a specific solution and presenting it to the airlines. In other words, this was a use that Apple had not envisioned when they first created the iPad. This is what good technology should do - provide a platform to create solutions to issues that even its creators never envisioned.
But I think what's important here is that this wasn't Apple coming to the FAA and saying "we want airlines to be able to use these in flight." Rather, this was the airlines looking at the available technology, then coming up with a specific solution and presenting it to the airlines. In other words, this was a use that Apple had not envisioned when they first created the iPad. This is what good technology should do - provide a platform to create solutions to issues that even its creators never envisioned.