TXnMA
Posted on 08/15/2019 11:24:55 AM PDT by CedarDave
The US Navy is to replace touchscreen controls on destroyers with physical systems in 2020 after a report into the fatal 2017 USS John S McCain collision branded the controls ‘unnecessarily complex’.
The investigation into the accident that resulted in the deaths of 10 sailors said that the complexity of the control system and a lack of training led to the collision.
Bridge design on US naval vessels is largely uncontrolled by the military, with a lack of specific requirements leaving design decisions to shipbuilders.
The step-back in technology will give sailors more tactile feedback and remove the ambiguity and uncertainty that played a role in the collision.
The Navy will retrofit mechanical controls on all DDG-51 (Arleigh Burke) class destroyers that currently use the Northrop Grumman Integrated Bridge and Navigation System (IBNS).
When reached for comment Northrop Grumman told Naval Technology: “We continue to work closely with the Navy on its navigation modernisation program by providing advanced capabilities to support the fleet.”
After incidents with the USS McCain and USS Fitzgerald, the US Navy surveyed the crews of its ships and found a majority of sailors wanted to see a return to more intuitive mechanical controls.
A report from the National Transportation Safety Board concluded that: “Training on the operation of the Integrated Bridge and Navigation System for John S McCain watchstanders was inadequate, because it did not ensure that the crew could perform the basic functions of the watch, such as the transfer of steering and thrust control between bridge stations.”
The report also found that “The design of the John S McCain’s touch-screen steering and thrust control system increased the likelihood of the operator errors that led to the collision.”
The report did not place sole blame on the IBNS, however, adding that the sailors’ lack of training and fatigue also played a key role in the incident.
The incident was caused when sailors attempted to pass control of the throttle from one console to another, resulting in the belief that they had lost control of the ship.
The system on board the ship allows throttle and steering to be controlled from multiple stations on the USS McCain’s bridge. The ship’s crew enabled the “backup manual mode” to get more intuitive control of the ship, however, this meant it could be controlled from multiple stations. As a result crew members on all three stations could steer the ship when they tried to regain control of the vessel steering swapped between the three stations.
As a result, the report recommended that the US Navy “issue permanent guidance directing destroyers equipped with the Integrated Bridge and Navigation System to operate in computer-assisted steering modes, except during an emergency.”
The report added: “Mechanical throttles provide complementary information to an operator: direction, force, and the ability to confirm either visually or by touch whether the throttles are ganged and working in unison.
“Mechanical throttles are used in aviation and on most vessels still operating in the Navy. They are often preferred over touch-screen displays as they provide both immediate and tactile feedback to the operator.”
The report concluded that the US Navy should revise the way it trains sailors to use the IBNS system and provide clearer technical manuals on how to correctly transfer controls between the systems consoles.
ding ding ding! We have a winner.
You should never put critical systems in the hands of a software GUI.
Poor software design, not poor technology.
They can’t make it work as well as the ordering kiosk at McD’s?
I despise touchscreens.
But, but, they seem to work fine on the Star Trek Next Generation bridge, especially when used by Data!
Somebody’s lying, when they say bridge design is uncontrolled. There are government approved manuals, specifications, corporate operations manuals submitted to the govt for approval, all before the first check is cut!@ What do you think those Plant Representative Offices, such as navpro, mean?
I wish they’d do this with car radios and most everything else.
And if I was the pope, I’d outlaw the color black for use on electronic and household applicances. Can’t see the labels.
Knobs. Physical switches. Buttons. Large.
I don’t want no plastic saddle, I want to feel that leather, when I ride.
TXnMA
“The step-back in technology will give sailors more tactile feedback and remove the ambiguity and uncertainty ...”
Characterization of this as a “step-back” is a big part of the reason they got to this mess in the first place.
Believing complicated controls and screens are better than simple controls that have been proven to work FOR DECADES is characteristic of the techno-fool mentality that can’t leave well enough alone.
The Techno-twit thinks that controls constantly have to be the most modern, woke, cool, high-tech, advanced, disruptive, transformative, innovative...
Instead, all you get is overcomplicated crap that some millenial idiot thinks is an improvement.
That extends to today's vehicles. I was given a ride in a new Chevy Silverado this morning and the display screen was full of icons and such that likely give TOO much information to the driver so as to distract him. I drive a 2001 P/U that still has regular gauges and some warning lights that tell me the important things to know while driving.
The whole idea of multiple stations having access to maneuvering controls at the same time is appalling.
Nothing like good old-fashioned mechanical systems.
A previous owner retrofitted a whiz-bang radio on my truck. I had to find the manual online just to figure out how to program the channels and find a preset station. I prefer an older model with button and knobs that are intuitive to use.
Being a controls engineer, I have programmed many HMIs (human-machine interface) and I try to keep the buttons and controls as simple and intuitive as possible.
I call bulls**t. The touch screens were designed by geeks for geeks. What they need is for the designers to work with the users and listen to them. The fighter pilots seem to have touch screen technology figured out or else they’d be falling out of the sky. Its just a matter of identifying the problem and applying a good fix, which the Navy is avoiding.
Much less to breakdown, especially during combat situations.
I have NO experience here..
But I would have to assume that two/ four big sticks with knobs/ handles on the top indicating forward or reverse and how fast is a lot easier to understand quickly than just about anything else.
The problem is lack of training. I ensured my guys were drilled on steering casualties almost every time we trained. They knew the system inside and out, and could isolate and configure around virtually any casualty, both in training and actual casualties. There is a reason we have so much redundancy in steering systems. Loss of steering is dangerous! Not knowing how it works is no excuse.
This thread might be of interest to you.
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.