Posted on 08/12/2019 6:20:55 AM PDT by robowombat
Navy Reverting DDGs Back to Physical Throttles, After Fleet Rejects Touchscreen Controls
By: Megan Eckstein August 9, 2019 10:46 AM
SAN DIEGO – The Navy will begin reverting destroyers back to a physical throttle and traditional helm control system in the next 18 to 24 months, after the fleet overwhelmingly said they prefer mechanical controls to touchscreen systems in the aftermath of the fatal USS John S. McCain (DDG-56) collision.
The investigation into the collision showed that a touchscreen system that was complex and that sailors had been poorly trained to use contributed to a loss of control of the ship just before it crossed paths with a merchant ship in the Singapore Strait. After the Navy released a Comprehensive Review related to the McCain and the USS Fitzgerald (DDG-62) collisions, Naval Sea Systems Command conducted fleet surveys regarding some of the engineering recommendations, Program Executive Officer for Ships Rear Adm. Bill Galinis said.
“When we started getting the feedback from the fleet from the Comprehensive Review effort – it was SEA 21 (NAVSEA’s surface ship lifecycle management organization) that kind of took the lead on doing some fleet surveys and whatnot – it was really eye-opening. And it goes into the, in my mind, ‘just because you can doesn’t mean you should’ category. We really made the helm control system, specifically on the [DDG] 51 class, just overly complex, with the touch screens under glass and all this kind of stuff,” Galinis said during a keynote speech at the American Society of Naval Engineers’ annual Fleet Maintenance and Modernization Symposium. “So as part of that, we actually stood up an organization within Team Ships to get after bridge commonality.”
NTSB Image
Galinis said that bridge design is something that shipbuilders have a lot of say in, as it’s not covered by any particular specification that the Navy requires builders to follow. As a result of innovation and a desire to incorporate new technology, “we got away from the physical throttles, and that was probably the number-one feedback from the fleet – they said, just give us the throttles that we can use.”
Galinis told USNI News after his speech that “we’re already in the contracting process, and it’s going to come on almost as a kit that’s relatively easy to install. [NAVSEA] would do it – it’s not something that the ship would do – but it doesn’t need to be done during a CNO availability, we think it could be done during a smaller one. Obviously, we have to work our way through that, but that’s the vision.”
NAVSEA spokeswoman Colleen O’Rourke told USNI News that “the Navy is designing and planning to install physical throttles on all DDG-51 class ships with the Integrated Bridge and Navigation System (IBNS), the ship control console with the touch-screen throttle control. The first throttle installation is scheduled for summer of 2020, after the hardware and software changes have been developed and fully tested to ensure the new configuration is safe, effective, and has training in place. The first in-service ship planned to receive the install is DDG-61; the first new construction ship planned to receive the install is DDG-128. A contract award to support these efforts is planned for this fiscal year.”
During a later panel, Galinis said that PEO Ships is also looking at variance in bridge designs and systems within ship classes – primarily the LHA/LHD amphibious assault ships, and to a lesser extent the LPD-17 amphibious transport docks – but he added that PEO Ships isn’t trying to achieve fleet-wide commonality at this time.
“Where we do have some variance (within ship classes) and what changes we should make to improve the functionality of standing bridge” are the focus of this ongoing engineering effort, he said.
NTSB Image
Also during the panel, Navy chief engineer and NAVSEA deputy commander for ship design, integration and engineering Rear Adm. Lorin Selby said that the move to achieve greater commonality is not just limited to where helm control systems are installed in the bridge, but how functions appear on the screens of the control systems, and anything else that would contribute to confusion for a sailor moving from one ship to another within the same class.
“When you look at a screen, where do you find heading? Is it in the same place, or do you have to hunt every time you go to a different screen? So the more commonality we can drive into these kind of human-machine interfaces, the better it is for the operator to quickly pick up what the situational awareness is, whatever aspect he’s looking at, whether it’s helm control, radar pictures, whatever. So we’re trying to drive that,” Selby said.
He added that NAVSEA meets once a month to talk about progress on any of the hundreds of recommendations that came out of the Comprehensive Review and the related Strategic Readiness Review that touch NAVSEA. That progress is reported up from NAVSEA to the vice chief of naval operations, who is overseeing monitoring progress implementing CR and SRR recommendations.
Some of the recommendations will require more substantive changes to address, such as the helm control system backfit effort. Others are much simpler but just require the thought by engineers to make sure ship operators have access to systems they need in an intuitive way.
Seaman Joseph Brown mans an older verison of helm controls on the bridge of USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) on July 25, 2019. US Navy Photo
John Pope, the executive director for the program executive office for command, control, communications, computers and intelligence (C4I), said the ships have a laptop in the bridge that runs the Automatic Identification System (AIS) receiver. Ship crews have, in the aftermath of the Fitzgerald and McCain collisions, complained that the laptops have a finicky connection to the ship via cables, and that they are located behind other gear and hard to access, and other issues that should be easy to address now that there’s a discussion about simplifying the user experience in the bridge.
“We’re going back and relocating that whole configuration– it’s easy to walk a laptop aboard, but how do you make sure that it’s being used right, configured correctly, and a sailor can rely on that?” Pope said. “So that’s something we picked up out of the Comprehensive Review.”
Most new cars slam on brakes before hitting something. I say embrace technology and make it work for you. Ditching these systems is kind of nutty at this stage.
maybe bad training and woman stuff but I’d say that the real fear for the future is....
CHINA.
Who knows what cr*p they put in the stuff they make.
I'm just glad it's the Navy where they worry about going down with the ship right along with everyone else so they're willing to admit a mistake and actually undo some mindless "improvement" that obviously wasn't widely tested for a period of time before it was done.
FWIW, I hate touch screens. I’ve used touch screen keyboards and they REALLY suck. You need tactile feedback to know you hit the right key. Heck, look at the push buttons on the Apollo spacecraft. All of the buttons are in a little hole so it’s very difficult to hit the wrong one.
Touch screens are nice for some things, but are a real pain for others.
And one of the biggest pains is when they don’t respond.
Control it with your smartphone not a good idea?
Who would have thought?
A similar issue with the new Boeing tanker, where they did away with the kid flying the boom visually in the back with a dude in the pilot cockpit using cameras and semi automated system. The lens distortions and what not make it real problematic.
The more interfaces you add, the more problems
There’s a reason modern airliners still have physical throttles.
It’s important to know, for certain, what throttle and brake input is being provided to a vehicle, and the ability to control that input without having to look at a screen.
MAX 8
Like the stick, the throttles control electrical and hydraulic systems. The retrofitted controls on the DDGs will do the same.
Not like the old days when the throttle on the bridge moved a nearly identical indicator in the engine room. Then the engineering officer would shout out the engine throttle.
Agreed. The biggest value in having physical throttles (whether mechanically linked to the actual engines/motors or not) is the operator knowing, without question, what input he is providing to the system.
You just don’t get that with a touchscreen.
Have you ever tried to steer something with a touch screen? They don't provide the physical feedback that helps people do the task.
There is much to be gained from using proven physical controls even if there is a computer responding to the user's actions.
MAX 8
My thoughts as well.
First we have Boeing admit their computer software was the root cause of two deadly accidents.
Now we have the Navy admitting their computer touchscreens were the root cause of two deadly accidents.
Maybe I’m old but a touchscreen throttle sounds like trouble waiting. (I realize it’s a bigger and heavier craft but I’m picturing a couple of our rough fishing trips and trying to manage a touchscreen while being hammered by the ocean...)
One hit and the electronics go out and you are rudderless. Really really stupid.
I can run AIS on a Raspberry Pi that costs about $100, so add about $5000 for gov’t procurement and a nice industrial enclosure and you’ve got that solved.
I agree with the assessment. Our brains connect and react using more than just vision. In fact visual, plus an additional sense will prevent errors. Especially in a split secomd decision.
If you cannot watch the road ahead of you.. why are you driving with sons, daughter and wives all around you.
Our brains work more efficiently with multiple connections.
How about our aviators? Thoughts on the brain’s ability to perceive and react with a single sense vs multiple.
If you need lane assist, you shouldn’t be driving. That’s commin sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.