Looks to me as if the FAA has too much time on their hands. Why does government have to get into this level of detail for this device?
Because they are charged with protecting the people flying in commercial and private aircraft (and folks on the ground), and this is the data that pilots use via their EFB (this is important stuff):
A. Class 1. These EFBs are portable, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) devices that are part of a pilot’s flight kit and are not mounted to the aircraft. An EFB attached to the pilot’s leg (e.g., kneeboard type) may still be considered a Class 1 EFB because it is not mounted to the aircraft. Class 1 EFBs that have Type B applications for aeronautical charts, approach charts, or electronic checklists (ECL) must be secured and viewable during critical phases of flight and must not interfere with flight control movement. The need for aeronautical charts, approach charts, and ECLs to be immediately available for viewing for all phases of flight is essential for an electronic format to be equivalent to the paper format being replaced. The ability to have departure and arrival charts, approach charts, and airport diagrams continuously in view is essential for situational awareness (SA) during critical phases of flight and very important to runway incursion prevention during takeoff, landing, and taxi operations. This view ability requirement is consistent with current FAA policy that pilot crewmembers have approach charts and airport diagrams viewable during those respective operations.
B. Class 2. These EFBs are typically mounted to the aircraft by a mounting device and may be connected to a data source, a hardwired power source, or an installed antenna. In order to be considered portable, tools must not be required to remove an EFB from the flight deck, and a pilot crewmember must be able to perform the task. Portable EFBs must be located on the flight deck and controlled by the flightcrew during all flight operations. Although attached to the aircraft via a mounting device, Class 2 EFB hardware must be accessible to the flightcrew and must be removable without the use of tools. The components of the Class 2 EFB include all the hardware and software needed to support EFB intended functions. A Class 2 EFB may consist of modular components (e.g., computer processing unit, display, controls). Any EFB hardware not located on the flight deck and not accessible by the flightcrew must be a certified installation via TC, amended TC, or STC. Any EFB hardware not accessible on the flight deck by the flightcrew and/or not portable must be installed and certificated equipment covered by a TC, amended TC, or STC. The one exception to being accessible on the flight deck is a remotely mounted antenna that provides signal reception to a Class 1 or 2 EFB.
I wonder if there thinking of throwing them out the windows and buying iPads instead, a iPad in the end would be less weight which is the goal of the program.
I heard that all of the recent Delta/Microsoft decisions were the direct order of Delta's CEO, Richard Anderson. He and Ballmer have been friends for a long time. Both of them have strong ties to Detroit and frequently overlap at events like The National Summit. Look for an article in the April 2012 Sky magazine for some of their candid conversations.
I'll bet Delta's IT staff are personally heavily invested in $MSFT. Such conflicts of interest should be reason enough to recuse oneself from the voting.
Not true. The majority are Apple fanatics. The Delta team has *excellent* ties to Cupertino and the two companies collaborated heavily to get the FlyDelta app launched (note how frequently it shows up in marketing images when Apple needs to use an icon).
When Delta's technology committee was charged with a new point-of-sale method, they recommended Apple. With the tablet tests winding down, IT recommended keeping the iPads. There's speculation that neither report was read by Richard, as the Delta executive team had already been swayed by the insider deal Microsoft offered.
PS: The flight attendants hate the Lumias too, so it's not just the pilots who are disappointed.
Because they are charged with protecting the people flying in commercial and private aircraft (and folks on the ground), and this is the data that pilots use via their EFB (this is important stuff):
A. Class 1. These EFBs are portable, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) devices that are part of a pilot’s flight kit and are not mounted to the aircraft. An EFB attached to the pilot’s leg (e.g., kneeboard type) may still be considered a Class 1 EFB because it is not mounted to the aircraft. Class 1 EFBs that have Type B applications for aeronautical charts, approach charts, or electronic checklists (ECL) must be secured and viewable during critical phases of flight and must not interfere with flight control movement. The need for aeronautical charts, approach charts, and ECLs to be immediately available for viewing for all phases of flight is essential for an electronic format to be equivalent to the paper format being replaced. The ability to have departure and arrival charts, approach charts, and airport diagrams continuously in view is essential for situational awareness (SA) during critical phases of flight and very important to runway incursion prevention during takeoff, landing, and taxi operations. This view ability requirement is consistent with current FAA policy that pilot crewmembers have approach charts and airport diagrams viewable during those respective operations.
B. Class 2. These EFBs are typically mounted to the aircraft by a mounting device and may be connected to a data source, a hardwired power source, or an installed antenna. In order to be considered portable, tools must not be required to remove an EFB from the flight deck, and a pilot crewmember must be able to perform the task. Portable EFBs must be located on the flight deck and controlled by the flightcrew during all flight operations. Although attached to the aircraft via a mounting device, Class 2 EFB hardware must be accessible to the flightcrew and must be removable without the use of tools. The components of the Class 2 EFB include all the hardware and software needed to support EFB intended functions. A Class 2 EFB may consist of modular components (e.g., computer processing unit, display, controls). Any EFB hardware not located on the flight deck and not accessible by the flightcrew must be a certified installation via TC, amended TC, or STC. Any EFB hardware not accessible on the flight deck by the flightcrew and/or not portable must be installed and certificated equipment covered by a TC, amended TC, or STC. The one exception to being accessible on the flight deck is a remotely mounted antenna that provides signal reception to a Class 1 or 2 EFB.
Yes, I know what they are used for. And no, the FAA does not have to get into details about how sensitive a touch device is or is not. You won't crash your aircraft if you have to tap twice on an approach chart.
It is not the way the Stephen King book ended, but it would be funny if Apple bought the last episode and it was revealed that the dome was generated from a secret Apple data center to protect the world from the spread of Windows devices.
I like that idea! I would definitely tune into the finale, if that were to happen." src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
With the way that the Surface tablets are selling (huge disastrous flop), you'd almost think that they were already under an impenetrable dome.
On a similar note I recently went to see the doctor and the staff had MS Surfaces. I asked the nurse what she thought of them and she said they'd tried hard to lobby for iPads. I would have thought that with a keyboard suppled the Surface would have been a better experience for data entry, but it seemed sooo clunky. Basically just a windows app running on a small screen.
you don't understand MD offices. (To paraphrase Jobs… "If you see a keyboard in a exam room, you've done it wrong").
[let's just say the least important skill doctors and nurses need is typing]
I can see a Surface working just as good as an iPad… as long as it's focused on voice and handwriting recognition*, and has enough local processing to do on the fly expert system analysis of the what's being said or handwritten. However, most Visual Studio apps suck big rocks when it comes to any sort of UX that is effective an patient setting. That's why starting from whole cloth as an iOS app would be the best way to start.
[*I know I was arguing about not including styluses in the base iPad 2 days ago… MD's exam rooms are 'nicheist' of niches…. no one office is the same (each subspecialty is like a new dialect… the system designed for a cardiologist is totally different than that of a cardiac surgeon, let alone a geneticist)]
[rest of historical medical UX rant removed… Former Electronic Health Record designer for a 3000 doctor group medical practice].
Yet, they decided to totally ignore the wishes of their pilots, the people who would actually be flying the plane and using the devices in flight. I trust the users more than I trust any bean counters or lame IT people.
As for "Under the Dome", yeah, it's a totally unrealistic show, and not a very good show, to be honest, but I just found it funny that under that dome, in that one little town, that's where the entire stock of Surface tablets and Windows phones seemed to end up.
Newsflash: most companies ignore the wishes of its employees.
I remember when most TV showed iPhones, now I mostly see Samsung devices, though I did see iPhones on Zero Hour.
Microsoft's marketing coup in selling Delta Airlines its Surface 2 tablet for use as an Electronic Flight Bag in place of Apple's iPad created friction with the company's pilots, who "fought hard" against the deal.
"We fought hard for iPad," a pilot working for the airline told <em>AppleInsider</em>. He described the Delta deal as being about money, travel contracts, and Delta's Information Technology staff historically being "in bed" with Microsoft.
Typical Microsoft, monopolizing their way to the top rather than earning it. Windows is the problem here and as long as it comes bundled on cheap PCs, this is never going to stop. It's cheap laptops that's the main seller. The only way Apple can maintain margins and compete on price is with an ARM Macbook Air but it would need to be under $500 and be 13"+. A larger iPad might suffice but it would need to behave more like a laptop running OS X for business use.
At least this vendor lock-in when it comes to tablets seems to be rare so the iPad should survive these tactics anyway. Ballmer has the cheek to say the company is ethical.
Its a common theme these days%u2026 IT departments failed to jump on the iPad when their business units saw the need and benefit. NOw that Microsoft has a half-azzed tablet out, IT thinks it will be easier. Why learn something new.. its just Microsoft right?
Forget about actually enabling your business users%u2026 when it becomes all about IT, you know a company needs to outsource%u2026 or will eventually.
A short term win for Microsoft and Delta IT%u2026 but I wouldn't want to be working for their IT department long term. This is a clear sign to bail%u2026 and a sign that I won't be flying Delta again.
Yes, I know what they are used for. And no, the FAA does not have to get into details about how sensitive a touch device is or is not. You won't crash your aircraft if you have to tap twice on an approach chart.
A short term win for Microsoft and Delta IT%u2026 but I wouldn't want to be working for their IT department long term. This is a clear sign to bail%u2026 and a sign that I won't be flying Delta again.
I'm not sure what tobacco has to do with Surface tablets, but are you thinking about series like "Mad Men"? I don't have a problem with the smoking, since it's realistic, and that's what everybody did back then.
I would have a big problem with shows like that if people did not smoke, and if it was an unrealistic, PC censored, fake portrayal.
"Mad Men" isn't futuristic but IMHO smoking is highly overemphasized (emphysema-cized?) in that show. If you're concerned with realism, none of the smoking on screen is realistic, because it doesn't cause choking and we never get to see the characters die in a morphine-induced slumber due to mere "complications" from lung cancer.
Try "Avatar".
I would have no problem at all with a period piece omitting toxic behaviors that still plague our society and make healthcare less affordable for the rest of us.
Looks to me as if the FAA has too much time on their hands. Why does government have to get into this level of detail for this device?
Because the FAA is extremely safety focussed (as I would hope!). And cockpit resource management is a huge deal. There have been numerous accidents where a pilot has read a gauge wrong incorrectly and shutdown the wrong engine or ran out of fuel for example. Ensuring that the information easily retrieved and easily read is extremely important. If a pilots are distracted trying to navigate some strangely put together app or they read the information incorrectly it could easily result in an accident.
Kind of makes you wonder if somebody high up at Delta didn't get a little somethin' extra for taking on all of those sub-par Surfaces. This thing stinks to high heaven. Sorry for those pilots. Great motivator, sticking with your pilots with technology they don't support. No wonder Delta's not doing so well.
Because the FAA is extremely safety focussed (as I would hope!). And cockpit resource management is a huge deal. There have been numerous accidents where a pilot has read a gauge wrong incorrectly and shutdown the wrong engine or ran out of fuel for example. Ensuring that the information easily retrieved and easily read is extremely important. If a pilots are distracted trying to navigate some strangely put together app or they read the information incorrectly it could easily result in an accident.
Your argument is bases off functions the iPad does not do, you realize that, yes? These devices replace the paper maps and charts, and some checklists. They DO NOT interact with the aircraft in any way. Also to your point, the ineptness of a pilot is not based on their device as you just gave example of a $80 million aircraft that the pilot mismanaged, and I am sure the FAA had very strict guidelines on.
Also, this has nothing to do with the app as it is not provided by Microsoft or Apple. Again, having to tap twice on a chart will not in any way make the flight unsafe.
No he's Japanese and trying write in English which he probably does much better than you write in Japanese. Either way we understood the message but unfortunately it seems to fail anyway because outsourcing customer support to India has almost nothing to do with US companies' IT departments trying to keep themselves employed. I doubt the pilots would be calling customer support anyway.
Comments
Looks to me as if the FAA has too much time on their hands. Why does government have to get into this level of detail for this device?
Because they are charged with protecting the people flying in commercial and private aircraft (and folks on the ground), and this is the data that pilots use via their EFB (this is important stuff):
A. Class 1. These EFBs are portable, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) devices that are part of a pilot’s flight kit and are not mounted to the aircraft. An EFB attached to the pilot’s leg (e.g., kneeboard type) may still be considered a Class 1 EFB because it is not mounted to the aircraft. Class 1 EFBs that have Type B applications for aeronautical charts, approach charts, or electronic checklists (ECL) must be secured and viewable during critical phases of flight and must not interfere with flight control movement. The need for aeronautical charts, approach charts, and ECLs to be immediately available for viewing for all phases of flight is essential for an electronic format to be equivalent to the paper format being replaced. The ability to have departure and arrival charts, approach charts, and airport diagrams continuously in view is essential for situational awareness (SA) during critical phases of flight and very important to runway incursion prevention during takeoff, landing, and taxi operations. This view ability requirement is consistent with current FAA policy that pilot crewmembers have approach charts and airport diagrams viewable during those respective operations.
B. Class 2. These EFBs are typically mounted to the aircraft by a mounting device and may be connected to a data source, a hardwired power source, or an installed antenna. In order to be considered portable, tools must not be required to remove an EFB from the flight deck, and a pilot crewmember must be able to perform the task. Portable EFBs must be located on the flight deck and controlled by the flightcrew during all flight operations. Although attached to the aircraft via a mounting device, Class 2 EFB hardware must be accessible to the flightcrew and must be removable without the use of tools. The components of the Class 2 EFB include all the hardware and software needed to support EFB intended functions. A Class 2 EFB may consist of modular components (e.g., computer processing unit, display, controls). Any EFB hardware not located on the flight deck and not accessible by the flightcrew must be a certified installation via TC, amended TC, or STC. Any EFB hardware not accessible on the flight deck by the flightcrew and/or not portable must be installed and certificated equipment covered by a TC, amended TC, or STC. The one exception to being accessible on the flight deck is a remotely mounted antenna that provides signal reception to a Class 1 or 2 EFB.
Not true. The majority are Apple fanatics. The Delta team has *excellent* ties to Cupertino and the two companies collaborated heavily to get the FlyDelta app launched (note how frequently it shows up in marketing images when Apple needs to use an icon).
When Delta's technology committee was charged with a new point-of-sale method, they recommended Apple. With the tablet tests winding down, IT recommended keeping the iPads. There's speculation that neither report was read by Richard, as the Delta executive team had already been swayed by the insider deal Microsoft offered.
PS: The flight attendants hate the Lumias too, so it's not just the pilots who are disappointed.
Is this story based on a comment from one pilot? It's so it seems to me that's wishful thinking on AI's part.
Because they are charged with protecting the people flying in commercial and private aircraft (and folks on the ground), and this is the data that pilots use via their EFB (this is important stuff):
A. Class 1. These EFBs are portable, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) devices that are part of a pilot’s flight kit and are not mounted to the aircraft. An EFB attached to the pilot’s leg (e.g., kneeboard type) may still be considered a Class 1 EFB because it is not mounted to the aircraft. Class 1 EFBs that have Type B applications for aeronautical charts, approach charts, or electronic checklists (ECL) must be secured and viewable during critical phases of flight and must not interfere with flight control movement. The need for aeronautical charts, approach charts, and ECLs to be immediately available for viewing for all phases of flight is essential for an electronic format to be equivalent to the paper format being replaced. The ability to have departure and arrival charts, approach charts, and airport diagrams continuously in view is essential for situational awareness (SA) during critical phases of flight and very important to runway incursion prevention during takeoff, landing, and taxi operations. This view ability requirement is consistent with current FAA policy that pilot crewmembers have approach charts and airport diagrams viewable during those respective operations.
B. Class 2. These EFBs are typically mounted to the aircraft by a mounting device and may be connected to a data source, a hardwired power source, or an installed antenna. In order to be considered portable, tools must not be required to remove an EFB from the flight deck, and a pilot crewmember must be able to perform the task. Portable EFBs must be located on the flight deck and controlled by the flightcrew during all flight operations. Although attached to the aircraft via a mounting device, Class 2 EFB hardware must be accessible to the flightcrew and must be removable without the use of tools. The components of the Class 2 EFB include all the hardware and software needed to support EFB intended functions. A Class 2 EFB may consist of modular components (e.g., computer processing unit, display, controls). Any EFB hardware not located on the flight deck and not accessible by the flightcrew must be a certified installation via TC, amended TC, or STC. Any EFB hardware not accessible on the flight deck by the flightcrew and/or not portable must be installed and certificated equipment covered by a TC, amended TC, or STC. The one exception to being accessible on the flight deck is a remotely mounted antenna that provides signal reception to a Class 1 or 2 EFB.
Yes, I know what they are used for. And no, the FAA does not have to get into details about how sensitive a touch device is or is not. You won't crash your aircraft if you have to tap twice on an approach chart.
It is not the way the Stephen King book ended, but it would be funny if Apple bought the last episode and it was revealed that the dome was generated from a secret Apple data center to protect the world from the spread of Windows devices.
I like that idea! I would definitely tune into the finale, if that were to happen.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
With the way that the Surface tablets are selling (huge disastrous flop), you'd almost think that they were already under an impenetrable dome.
On a similar note I recently went to see the doctor and the staff had MS Surfaces. I asked the nurse what she thought of them and she said they'd tried hard to lobby for iPads. I would have thought that with a keyboard suppled the Surface would have been a better experience for data entry, but it seemed sooo clunky. Basically just a windows app running on a small screen.
you don't understand MD offices. (To paraphrase Jobs… "If you see a keyboard in a exam room, you've done it wrong").
[let's just say the least important skill doctors and nurses need is typing]
I can see a Surface working just as good as an iPad… as long as it's focused on voice and handwriting recognition*, and has enough local processing to do on the fly expert system analysis of the what's being said or handwritten. However, most Visual Studio apps suck big rocks when it comes to any sort of UX that is effective an patient setting. That's why starting from whole cloth as an iOS app would be the best way to start.
[*I know I was arguing about not including styluses in the base iPad 2 days ago… MD's exam rooms are 'nicheist' of niches…. no one office is the same (each subspecialty is like a new dialect… the system designed for a cardiologist is totally different than that of a cardiac surgeon, let alone a geneticist)]
[rest of historical medical UX rant removed… Former Electronic Health Record designer for a 3000 doctor group medical practice].
Newsflash: most companies ignore the wishes of its employees.
I remember when most TV showed iPhones, now I mostly see Samsung devices, though I did see iPhones on Zero Hour.
Typical Microsoft, monopolizing their way to the top rather than earning it. Windows is the problem here and as long as it comes bundled on cheap PCs, this is never going to stop. It's cheap laptops that's the main seller. The only way Apple can maintain margins and compete on price is with an ARM Macbook Air but it would need to be under $500 and be 13"+. A larger iPad might suffice but it would need to behave more like a laptop running OS X for business use.
At least this vendor lock-in when it comes to tablets seems to be rare so the iPad should survive these tactics anyway. Ballmer has the cheek to say the company is ethical.
Forget about actually enabling your business users%u2026 when it becomes all about IT, you know a company needs to outsource%u2026 or will eventually.
A short term win for Microsoft and Delta IT%u2026 but I wouldn't want to be working for their IT department long term. This is a clear sign to bail%u2026 and a sign that I won't be flying Delta again.
Yes, I know what they are used for. And no, the FAA does not have to get into details about how sensitive a touch device is or is not. You won't crash your aircraft if you have to tap twice on an approach chart.
+1
A short term win for Microsoft and Delta IT%u2026 but I wouldn't want to be working for their IT department long term. This is a clear sign to bail%u2026 and a sign that I won't be flying Delta again.
No pun intended?
I'm not sure what tobacco has to do with Surface tablets, but are you thinking about series like "Mad Men"? I don't have a problem with the smoking, since it's realistic, and that's what everybody did back then.
I would have a big problem with shows like that if people did not smoke, and if it was an unrealistic, PC censored, fake portrayal.
"Mad Men" isn't futuristic but IMHO smoking is highly overemphasized (emphysema-cized?) in that show. If you're concerned with realism, none of the smoking on screen is realistic, because it doesn't cause choking and we never get to see the characters die in a morphine-induced slumber due to mere "complications" from lung cancer.
Try "Avatar".
I would have no problem at all with a period piece omitting toxic behaviors that still plague our society and make healthcare less affordable for the rest of us.
Looks to me as if the FAA has too much time on their hands. Why does government have to get into this level of detail for this device?
Because the FAA is extremely safety focussed (as I would hope!). And cockpit resource management is a huge deal. There have been numerous accidents where a pilot has read a gauge wrong incorrectly and shutdown the wrong engine or ran out of fuel for example. Ensuring that the information easily retrieved and easily read is extremely important. If a pilots are distracted trying to navigate some strangely put together app or they read the information incorrectly it could easily result in an accident.
... M$ Surface: "Clear sailing ahead!"
It's also unlikely that Microsoft will still be selling the "Surface 2" model two years from now, when Delta completes rolling out its EFB program.
Surface 2 in Delta cockpits brings several new meanings to the phrase "crash and burn."
Because the FAA is extremely safety focussed (as I would hope!). And cockpit resource management is a huge deal. There have been numerous accidents where a pilot has read a gauge wrong incorrectly and shutdown the wrong engine or ran out of fuel for example. Ensuring that the information easily retrieved and easily read is extremely important. If a pilots are distracted trying to navigate some strangely put together app or they read the information incorrectly it could easily result in an accident.
Your argument is bases off functions the iPad does not do, you realize that, yes? These devices replace the paper maps and charts, and some checklists. They DO NOT interact with the aircraft in any way. Also to your point, the ineptness of a pilot is not based on their device as you just gave example of a $80 million aircraft that the pilot mismanaged, and I am sure the FAA had very strict guidelines on.
Also, this has nothing to do with the app as it is not provided by Microsoft or Apple. Again, having to tap twice on a chart will not in any way make the flight unsafe.
It's "India" not "Indian". What are you twelve?
No he's Japanese and trying write in English which he probably does much better than you write in Japanese. Either way we understood the message but unfortunately it seems to fail anyway because outsourcing customer support to India has almost nothing to do with US companies' IT departments trying to keep themselves employed. I doubt the pilots would be calling customer support anyway.
Not surprised at all. Given a choice most people will pick a product that is at least perceived to be superior.