Love the contradiction in the title and subhead. Talk about deception and proof that you guys are so far from legitimate that it's laughable...unless Mickey is suffering from split personality disorder and the editor's of this rag could care less about integrity?
Headline:
Apple iPad software issue grounds 'several dozen' American Airlines flights
subhead:
At least one American Airlines flight was grounded before takeoff on Tuesday due to a software bug that disabled......
Since when is "several dozen" the same as "At least one"?
Let me try to remember back to my elementary school days.
At least one = 1
A dozen = 12, so several dozen could be upwards of 48.
Yup, I could see where you messed up...real close. What a joke you people are.
They were using the SSS Numbering system (Samsung Sales / Shipments) -- Few and Many.
This is one of the most ridiculous comments I've ever seen. It's not an all or nothing world. "The whole reason for EFB's is to get rid of paper - COMPLETELY". LOL!!! So - if even one page of paper remains, the project is a failure? A complete failure? LMAO!!! Even though it still saved millions of dollars and millions of printed pages? Get real and get realistic. I understand that having backup copies available at the airport was not a viable solution because a) one backup copy would mean 1 flight could leave - and there would still be dozens of flights delayed and no more backup copies to hand out. But your use of the word "COMPLETELY" in your statement is ridiculous.
The real question and the real failure here is in the IT departments failure to adequately test a software update and do a few test (pilot) deployments. This is a well known change management practice and several people in the organization definitely deserve to be fired over such a stupid and risky shortcut. Whatever vendor is responsible for their MDM solution should also be kicked out if they did not insist that trial deployments be performed before sending the update out to their entire fleet. The MDM software should also have detected the corruption in the files and not allowed the deployment to occur. This would never have happened if they had used Radia for their MDM solution. I have several friends that work for companies using Radia and I've heard multiple stories about how it saved their asses on multiple occasions. There should have also been a rollback plan in place! What? The update is corrupt? Damn. Post a10-minute delay and we'll roll back the software update to yesterday's version! Seriously - who is getting fired for this??? Certainly the IT director - but who else???
You must be an engineer.
If the latest information isn't available, it's not safe for the airplane to leave the ground. Not "put back the outdated information" or "just keep flying anyway"
the latest information wasn't available, so the airplane didn't leave the ground.
This is one of the most ridiculous comments I've ever seen. It's not an all or nothing world. "The whole reason for EFB's is to get rid of paper - COMPLETELY". LOL!!! So - if even one page of paper remains, the project is a failure? A complete failure? LMAO!!! Even though it still saved millions of dollars and millions of printed pages? Get real and get realistic. I understand that having backup copies available at the airport was not a viable solution because a) one backup copy would mean 1 flight could leave - and there would still be dozens of flights delayed and no more backup copies to hand out. But your use of the word "COMPLETELY" in your statement is ridiculous.
The real question and the real failure here is in the IT departments failure to adequately test a software update and do a few test (pilot) deployments. This is a well known change management practice and several people in the organization definitely deserve to be fired over such a stupid and risky shortcut. Whatever vendor is responsible for their MDM solution should also be kicked out if they did not insist that trial deployments be performed before sending the update out to their entire fleet. The MDM software should also have detected the corruption in the files and not allowed the deployment to occur. This would never have happened if they had used Radia for their MDM solution. I have several friends that work for companies using Radia and I've heard multiple stories about how it saved their asses on multiple occasions. There should have also been a rollback plan in place! What? The update is corrupt? Damn. Post a10-minute delay and we'll roll back the software update to yesterday's version! Seriously - who is getting fired for this??? Certainly the IT director - but who else???
You only think it's ridiculous because you're trying to understand something you completely don't understand.
The EFB is their to eliminate not only the weight of manuals, but the costly subscriptions associated with some of that paper as well as printing costs of manuals that are updated constantly.
So yes, any paper that needs to be carried is, essentially, a failure of the EFB program.
This is a rare (first time) occurrence and I doubt it'll happen again. AA is using and older version of the Jeppesen app and will be moving to the pro version very soon.
That's not how and EFB (electronic flight bag ) works. The iPad doesn't just have electronic versions of a few manuals. In order to "keep a copy at the gate", they would need a different "copy of the manual" at the gate for each individual flight. Not realistic, that is why the pilot has the info in his flight bag for that day. When the EFB goes down, there is no quick workaround.
Passengers aboard American Airlines flight #1654 from Dallas to Austin said EFB iPads belonging to both captain and copilot "went blank" as crew prepared for takeoff, reports Quartz.
"The pilot came on and said that his first mate's iPad powered down unexpectedly, and his had too, and that the entire 737 fleet on American had experienced the same behavior," said Philip McRell, a passenger on flight #1654.
Update: American Airlines has confirmed the delay of "several dozen" flights due to the iPad issue.
If this is affecting several dozen flights then it is probably not a localized issue specific to the iPad or it's third party software.
I would suspect a server outage or data corruption as the culprit.
You have to read to the third fucking paragraph to finally find out it was NOT the actual iPad that had the problem! This is some real shitty reporting!!!
The creator of the app is Jeppesen, a Boeing company, and the app depends upon the periodic update of Enroute Charts, Terminal Plates (procedures) and Manuals. These scheduled updates are as frequent as every two weeks and today, April 29th, is a transition day to the April 30th Enroute Charts and Manuals on Jeppesen Flight Deck. It's a guess that something didn't happen in the update cycle that has created the so-called flight groundings. Jeppesen is probably all over this issue as we speculate.
Rule: it's always Apple's fault. This wouldn't have happened with the Surface Pro running Windows 8. The pilots could just enter the admin password and edit the corrupt registry keys themselves. They should also update their virus definitions and update Flash, Acrobat Reader and Silverlight. Just be sure to uncheck the "special offers" box or you'll change your default home page or search engine.
I guess Delta with their Surface Pros are pretty happy now.
Don't know if anyone's already linked to this, but here's a link to more info: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-32513066 To me, this looks like a "plus" for the iPad since they fixed it so quickly.
Super irresponsible headline that implies there's a problem with the system software on iPad, when it's the Jeppesen software that is the problem. The headline should have been:
Jeppesen Mobile Terminal Chart app software issue grounds 'several dozen' American Airlines flights
or
Jeppesen Chart app grounds 'several' dozen' American Airlines flights
I expect more from AppleInsider than the same type of misleading, click-bait headlines that most people here complain about from other sites. AI articles even mention that the rest of the media treats Apple this way, so isn't both ironic and crappy to do it too? Shame.
You only think it's ridiculous because you're trying to understand something you completely don't understand.
The EFB is their to eliminate not only the weight of manuals, but the costly subscriptions associated with some of that paper as well as printing costs of manuals that are updated constantly.
So yes, any paper that needs to be carried is, essentially, a failure of the EFB program.
This is a rare (first time) occurrence and I doubt it'll happen again. AA is using and older version of the Jeppesen app and will be moving to the pro version very soon.
Exaggerate much? I understand that the program was put in place to save money and to perhaps make things easier and more convenient - by saving on most of the things you mentioned - printing costs, weights, etc. but I don't see why the subscription itself would be any cheaper. The subscription is required for the actual information, maps, etc which are still needed. The only reason the subscription cost would be lower is because of the savings from paper, ink, printing, binding, delivery etc - which we kind of already called out as a savings. No need to count them twice! Anyhow...if for any reason a small amount of paper was still required or kept for backup or other purposes, the program would NOT be considered a "failure". The initiative would be deemed to be 95% successful or 98% successful - or whatever the actual percentage worked out to be. The point I was making was that only an idiot would call the project a FAILURE if it saved huge sums of money and successfully accomplished 98% of the projects initial goals.
I do however think that the implementation of the entire system is flawed if the new information has to be delivered and activated on a specific date and time. Surely the current datafile and the new datafile could be created with an overlap period of a week? Or even just 24-48 hours. That would provide plenty of time for the distribution to be tested and certified and avoid issues like this one.
Comments
How can jet fuel cost $3 a gallon?
(@Junebug172: hint - it's not "Eve"
)
It's just kerosene.
They were using the SSS Numbering system (Samsung Sales / Shipments) -- Few and Many.
You must be an engineer.
If the latest information isn't available, it's not safe for the airplane to leave the ground. Not "put back the outdated information" or "just keep flying anyway"
the latest information wasn't available, so the airplane didn't leave the ground.
Yep. It doesn't happen often. In fact, this is the first time. Very rare occurrence.
No. Each pilot pulls their updates when they check in for a flight.
You only think it's ridiculous because you're trying to understand something you completely don't understand.
The EFB is their to eliminate not only the weight of manuals, but the costly subscriptions associated with some of that paper as well as printing costs of manuals that are updated constantly.
So yes, any paper that needs to be carried is, essentially, a failure of the EFB program.
This is a rare (first time) occurrence and I doubt it'll happen again. AA is using and older version of the Jeppesen app and will be moving to the pro version very soon.
What's a "first mate"?
They likely mean right seat, so co-pilot as 737s don't carry a flight engineer.
Yes, I know.
They're called First Officers, not mates.
Mates are on boats.
That's not how and EFB (electronic flight bag ) works. The iPad doesn't just have electronic versions of a few manuals. In order to "keep a copy at the gate", they would need a different "copy of the manual" at the gate for each individual flight. Not realistic, that is why the pilot has the info in his flight bag for that day. When the EFB goes down, there is no quick workaround.
Passengers aboard American Airlines flight #1654 from Dallas to Austin said EFB iPads belonging to both captain and copilot "went blank" as crew prepared for takeoff, reports Quartz.
"The pilot came on and said that his first mate's iPad powered down unexpectedly, and his had too, and that the entire 737 fleet on American had experienced the same behavior," said Philip McRell, a passenger on flight #1654.
Update: American Airlines has confirmed the delay of "several dozen" flights due to the iPad issue.
If this is affecting several dozen flights then it is probably not a localized issue specific to the iPad or it's third party software.
I would suspect a server outage or data corruption as the culprit.
You want the real click-bait version of this trashy misreporting?
http://9to5mac .com/2015/04/28/american-airlines-ipad-outage/
You have to read to the third fucking paragraph to finally find out it was NOT the actual iPad that had the problem! This is some real shitty reporting!!!
PS Love how Ai now sensors posted links!!!
The creator of the app is Jeppesen, a Boeing company, and the app depends upon the periodic update of Enroute Charts, Terminal Plates (procedures) and Manuals. These scheduled updates are as frequent as every two weeks and today, April 29th, is a transition day to the April 30th Enroute Charts and Manuals on Jeppesen Flight Deck. It's a guess that something didn't happen in the update cycle that has created the so-called flight groundings. Jeppesen is probably all over this issue as we speculate.
I guess Delta with their Surface Pros are pretty happy now.
Their pilot's fought the move.
The move to a Microsoft product was a political one. Delta is making a push into Seatlle and this was one way the "grease" that push into the airport.
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-32513066
To me, this looks like a "plus" for the iPad since they fixed it so quickly.
Super irresponsible headline that implies there's a problem with the system software on iPad, when it's the Jeppesen software that is the problem. The headline should have been:
Jeppesen Mobile Terminal Chart app software issue grounds 'several dozen' American Airlines flights
or
Jeppesen Chart app grounds 'several' dozen' American Airlines flights
I expect more from AppleInsider than the same type of misleading, click-bait headlines that most people here complain about from other sites. AI articles even mention that the rest of the media treats Apple this way, so isn't both ironic and crappy to do it too? Shame.
Just pondering...
Exaggerate much? I understand that the program was put in place to save money and to perhaps make things easier and more convenient - by saving on most of the things you mentioned - printing costs, weights, etc. but I don't see why the subscription itself would be any cheaper. The subscription is required for the actual information, maps, etc which are still needed. The only reason the subscription cost would be lower is because of the savings from paper, ink, printing, binding, delivery etc - which we kind of already called out as a savings. No need to count them twice! Anyhow...if for any reason a small amount of paper was still required or kept for backup or other purposes, the program would NOT be considered a "failure". The initiative would be deemed to be 95% successful or 98% successful - or whatever the actual percentage worked out to be. The point I was making was that only an idiot would call the project a FAILURE if it saved huge sums of money and successfully accomplished 98% of the projects initial goals.
I do however think that the implementation of the entire system is flawed if the new information has to be delivered and activated on a specific date and time. Surely the current datafile and the new datafile could be created with an overlap period of a week? Or even just 24-48 hours. That would provide plenty of time for the distribution to be tested and certified and avoid issues like this one.