Airbus 380 To Have Linux In Every Seat

jpatokal writes "Singapore Airlines will be rolling out the A380 superjumbo on October 26th, and a surprise awaits in the seat of every passenger: their personal Linux PC, running Red Hat. In addition to running the in-flight entertainment, passengers can also use a full copy of StarOffice, and there's a USB slot for importing/exporting documents or plugging in your own keyboard/mouse. Screen size is 10.6" (1280x768) in economy, 15.4" in business and a whopping 23" in first class (along with free noise-canceling headphones). The system is already available on current B777-300ER planes and will also be outfitted on the upcoming B787 Dreamliners."

Comments

Delta/Song already uses Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not a full machine, but if you've flown Delta and used their in-flight entertainment machines (the trivia is great), they're using Redhat. I know this because I watched it crash and a subsequent reboot which was grub...

the kernel was a 2.4 version as I recall...

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

I've flown Delta on a 757 and seen Linux reboot, too (I think we lost power while waiting for an open runway slot to take off from). But the system in the summary sounds much different; the Delta system didn't have StarOffice, it just had TV, movies, moving maps, etc. Basically read-only, except for paying for the in-flight movies.

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[S.Gleissner]

No, it was not a crash, as i wrote here.

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[shawn443]

I see. They must have recompiled the kernel.

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[choas]

I just returned to the Netherlands this morning, flew from Las Vegas.

Delta indeed uses red-hat linux on their 'seat in front of you consoles'

Also loading some modules which taint the kernel (according to the message I saw)
I think it had to do with AAC.

Nothing against Linux on planes, BUT please, have someone on-board to service the
system or let it be serviced from the ground. As our flight from Las Vegas to New York
only showed red hat reboots continually during the flight, all the time. seemed like
Linux did boot with some ramdisk checksum errors, but it booted, but when the X layer
came on this triggered another reboot.

I'm a unix guy all the way, and they told me I could not have access to the plane's
media 'mainframe' or I would have had a look to see what was wrong. All I saw was that
the whole right side economy side of the plane was left with a rebooting red-hat distribution
showing a cute penguin in its left corner...

The whole time... 5 hours long...

This was NOT a good commercial. I wish it had been.

The whole system worked perfectly when I was flying to San Francisco two weeks ago!

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[RAMMS EIN]

You must be new here. You do _not_ talk about Linux crashing on Slashdot.

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[jez9999]

I'm a unix guy all the way, and they told me I could not have access to the plane's
media 'mainframe' or I would have had a look to see what was wrong.

Wow, they sound like idiots. What airline wouldn't want a random passenger given root access to their systems?

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[jc42]

You do _not_ talk about Linux crashing on Slashdot.

Heh. One question that came to mind immediately was: Did those people actually see linux crash, or did they see linux rebooting. These are two very different things, of course, but I've found that even experienced users can be rather sloppy about such insignificant details.

I'm sure that most people who've taken commercial flights have noticed things like the cabin lights all flickering at times, especially during takeoff. No big deal for lights, but this will "crash" pretty much any computer using that power system. And the crew obviously has control of the lights; why would you be surprised if they could also control all the computers? Just as the control panel has buttons to turn all the lights on and off, I'd expect that you could reboot all the seatback computers from the control panel. You could also override what they're doing and show some particular video clip.

I'd think that the ability to tell all these little computers to do something simultaneously would be a good selling point. And considering how the power-supply systems work in commercial airliners, I'd expect that it would be normal to do a net reboot of the little buggers frequently. The ability to easily do such things from a central control system would be a major selling point.

So, rather than us _not_ talking about linux "crashing", I'd think we'd be interested in information about how these seatback computers are configured and how they're managed by the crew.

Not that I expect to see much real information here. And I'd guess that much of the airlines' control software is proprietary, for "security" (by obscurity) reasons.

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[drix]

I'm a unix guy all the way, and they told me I could not have access to the plane's
media 'mainframe' or I would have had a look to see what was wrong. I am shocked--shocked--that in this day and age a bunch of non-technical people would be hesitant about letting you jack in to the "mainframe" of a fly-by-wire aircraft at 30,000 feet.

Igniting your shoes is so 2002.

industrial espionage

[Ignis Flatus]

what a great way to spy on naive commuters

I always believed

[JRGhaddar]

Penguins CAN fly!

Re:I always believed

[Anonymous Coward]

Penguins CAN fly! You could get a whale to fly if you attached four 76,000-lbf Rolls Royce Trent 900 engines to it.

Re:I always believed

[JustOK]

Not if its on the watch list.

Re:I always believed

[Ultra64]

you know how big of a bomb someone can fit in "their own keyboard and mouse"?

One the size of a keyboard and mouse?

Re:I always believed

[meringuoid]

speaking of that, you know how big of a bomb someone can fit in "their own keyboard and mouse"?

About the same size of bomb they can fit into a laptop. They'd better open up every one of those on its way in, and I mean with a screwdriver. One terrorist in a nice suit with a business class ticket and a rigged laptop = boom.

FWIW

[The Living Fractal]

I don't know how they are setting up their installations but I would _highly_ recommend they use unattended installation images and re-image the installation EVERY day. Seems only logical to me. Neh?

Re:FWIW

[tftp]

Of course it's possible, and that's how Linux-based embedded systems work. Your /home/$USERNAME can be created in RAM and deleted (recreated from a skeleton) after you log out (or the system restarted.) There is nothing else writeable on the whole box. This is necessary in embedded systems to prevent Flash wearing out, and to ensure reliability. Same needs here.

Re:FWIW

[nukem996]

In this case it would be best to use Thin clients. It would cut down the cost of having a powerful CPU and there would be no need for a hard disk. Power would also be conserved(which is important considering you are on battery on a plane). To top it all of no matter how much someone screws with their machine on a reboot everything is restored.

Re:FWIW

[modecx]

Why not have a single server, and have the client heads netboot off of the server after every flight? That way, it makes it super simple to push updates, kills the chance of having people permanently mess with the systems, and everyone is happy.

Re:FWIW

[tftp]

I use embedded Linux at work, and the hardware that we run it on has a jumper which allows to electrically prevent any and all writes into the Flash. If you want to upgrade the software, press a button inside. No software can compensate for a WP# pin on Flash being tied to the ground; you'd need to do the iPhone-style hack with a soldering iron, and I don't see this as likely during a flight :-)

Re:FWIW

[tftp]

Well, this thing is no different from an internet cafe, and we know that those are popular enough. It's probably because most users of an internet cafe do not care about their email passwords. Business users are typically issued company notebooks which connect to the company's mail server through a VPN. But if a company permits direct access to its internal webmail then it assumes the risk of passwords being stolen one way or another, since you type them into the browser. Any keylogger, or a custom build of Firefox, would do the stealing easily, since the cafe owner is the sysadmin on all the computers. But all things considered, I would trust a large airline more than a shady Internet cafe owner.

Re:FWIW

[Jarik_Tentsu]

Actually, our schools uses that kinda thing too, 'cept with Windows and a zero-card.

It works extremely well...

In my old school, all hard drives were writable and despite the admin's trying to limit privaledges, PCs had to constantly be nuked and reinstalled due to the crap people put on there. Here, every time a computer restarts, it wipes its HDD and installs from a zero-card.

The great thing about this is that it doesn't restrict what students can do while they're using the computers (installing applications required for work, etc) but it keeps each system perfectly clean.

~Jarik

This is not the first Airbus with Linux

[S.Gleissner]

Last year in february, i flew from Frankfurt, Germany to Johannesburg, South Africa with a brand new South African Airlines A340-400 Airbus. Just after boarding, the cabin crew resetted the In-Flight-Entertainment-System and several hundred screens in the seats showed a typical Linux booting screen with a small penguin in the upper left corner. They did not use a spash screen and it was possible to take a quick look at the booting messages... by the way, they made a network boot.

Security?

[eli pabst]

Hope they secure these well. With all the business travelers it would be a great place to drop a rootkit. From the article it sounds like each seat actually has a thin client, which would in effect reinstall the OS after each user/flight which is good from a security standpoint. But with access to a keyboard and USB hub, it still sounds a bit more vulnerable to abuse than a standard kiosk.

Re:Security?

[eli pabst]

You don't have a very good imagination then. Adding a keyboard and USB significantly increases the risk, look at the TJ Max breach, they got access using a USB port on a kiosk (shouldn't have been on a trusted network but that's another issue). While I think the thin-client idea significantly helps, you could easily load a recent exploit via the USB drive then sniff traffic or perform other nastiness like ARP poisoning/MITM and grab usernames/passwords/CC info of those on the flight.

Re:Security?

[eli pabst]

did i say it was fool proof? No. Well you did say "it's about as secure as i can imagine" and frankly it's not even remotely secure. There is a good reason that kiosks don't normally come with keyboards and usb ports, because it allows the user to have too much access to secure effectively. With a USB drive you can bring your own tools with you like a bash shell, exploits, rootkits.

Your assuming the user has any execute permissions at all Yeah, that will be real useful system with no execute privileges. They won't be able run any applications! You might as well give them an etch-a-sketch. Restricting write access is pointless if they can run a binary from the USB drive; they'll just escalate privileges and change them as they like.

You accuse me of having no imagination, yet fail to put forward a more secure system Custom interface that only allows the user to perform a very strictly defined set of tasks (rudimentary word processing,email, web surfing with no scripting support), no USB port, and a keyboard with only alpha-numeric keys so user can't escape out of applications or drop out of X into the commandline or even better yet a touchscreen.

Re:Security?

[drspliff]

Touchscreens are not a solution to badly designed kiosk software. I was once in a Kodak photo printing shop which let you put in your media card, their kiosk stuff scanned it, found all the pictures and let you do basic editing before submitting it for printing.

After a few minutes I'd managed to kill the kiosk software, bring up the on-screen keyboard and start browsing around their local network shares - which had "saved" customer pictures on.

My point is that for kiosk style systems it should be an absolutely minimal customized install with restricted network access. Obviously on aircraft entertainment systems they'd be completely separate, but you just need one badly judged integration combined with an off the shelf system and you'll end up with another disaster like the Kodak shop.

Well, no wonder.

[twitter]

Airlines are not going to put an OS synonymous with "crash" in front of passengers. Everything, right down to the lighting has to work well to keep the appearance of order. Anything else makes the passengers nervous and looking for another airline.

Re:Well, no wonder.

[Kjella]

The 1990s called and would like their Win95/98/ME FUD back. Most people have an extremely short-term memory (see: elections) and in recent years with XP it's been mostly stable. It will go months between every time I have an involuntary shutdown (but sometimes it seems to build up cruft so a reboot is necessary - a scheduled one is still a lot different from a BSOD). Unless you're talking to someone that got a machine infected by viruses and shit, people actually won't curse like they once did. It works well enough that Windows crashes are actually on the noise level of power outages and application crashes, yes they're annoying but you're not buying an UPS for it, nor are you switching to Linux. And please don't compare Linux server uptimes with Windows desktop uptimes, Windows uptimes improve a lot on server class hardware too. In short, they're both stable enough for desktop use, so figure out what Linux does better instead of using antiquated and mostly irrelevant rethoric.

Re:Well, no wonder.

[dbIII]

Yes, but the above poster forgets that many of the linux advocates here are also responsible for quite a few Microsoft systems too and know from a lot of personal experience why you need backup domain controllers, rebooting machines at short intervals (eg. every week) due to memory leaks and the need to keep different services on different machines despite low resource usage - plus all the desktop hassles. They also forget that these long uptimes on other sytems are often on low end desktop hardware that has been retired from destop use and used as print servers or various other task - so the server class hardware argument does not carry.

There's too big a difference between stability over a eight hour period on a single user system that gets shut down nightly and other machines - hence the 2003 version and even 2000 version instead of XP.

Long uptimes have a suprising downside - I always forget how long it takes Solaris to boot and get nervous staring at a blank screen for a long time every time I start it - once every year (we don't need it over Christmas so it goes down for a week). An uptime of a year is no major accomplisment for any decent operating system. That is what people in the last decade or two mean by computer stability - and Microsoft software despite all it's advantages and improvements is just not playing in that game at all. They got to where they are by being cheap enough and just good enough. It gave us what is really the Microsoft PC instead of the IBM PC, which makes me grateful that I can effectively put a relatively inexpensive more powerful version of games machines into a rack to make up a processing cluster instead of something expensive from Sun or IBM.

StarOffice or Microsoft Office?

[Grond]

TFA says that the systems run Microsoft Office, not StarOffice. Unfortunately, their video doesn't show any office software, so it's hard to tell. Maybe someone will hack up a version of portable OpenOffice capable of running on the systems.

Re:StarOffice or Microsoft Office?

[jours]

> TFA says that the systems run Microsoft Office, not StarOffice

Yeah, the two articles don't agree on that. But the system is based on the Panasonic eX2 which is Linux by all accounts. And simple math (500+ seats times $299 per office license) tells you a single plane would have an IT cost roughly equivalent to that of a mid-sized company.

I think the smart money's on StarOffice here...

Re:StarOffice or Microsoft Office?

[Redneck Hacker]

TFA says that the systems run Microsoft Office, not StarOffice. I'm sure they meant StarOffice. Unless there's a Linux port of MS Office that no one told me about.

Re:StarOffice or Microsoft Office?

[sabit666]

You mean this? http://portableapps.com/apps/office/openoffice_por table

finally

[Anonymous Coward]

nerds can join their own version of the mile high club!

Re:finally

[maxwell demon]

Well, it gives a completely new meaning to the term "uptime" ...

Not according to the article you link to

[fantomas]

Not according to the article you link to. That's talking about freighter version.

Dedicated turbine

[Harmonious Botch]

Not by the engines. Often it is a small dedicated turbine in the tailcone. That way you can have relatively quiet power while you are on the tarmac, and nobody gets sucked into the engines, and the relibility is higher because they are run at lower stresses ( ie: never at 100%, like the main engnes do at takeoff)

Re:Dedicated turbine

[tftp]

Usually each engine has a primary generator that is powering the airplane's circuits. This ensures that an engine failure (or shutdown) does not turn the entire airplane off, but only reduces the available power. An airplane needs an awful amount of electricity to fly; even your common strobe lights, mandatory in flight, consume kilowatts, and the landing lights are usually more powerful and must be on during the landing. But there is plenty of more important hardware on board, such as engine and flight control, navigation, radio, deicing, gear, fire suppression, etc. Imagine losing all power at 40,000 ft at night - you could be falling like a stone and not knowing it ... because of that every passenger airplane made in last 50 years carries some batteries, and if they are used then they only feed the flight support group (essential instruments) and only for so many minutes (10-20) because of the current needed.

Also many airplanes have an auxiliary power plant, as you say placed at the tail, it is usually needed to provide fast moving air to spin the main engines, but can produce electricity as well. It is started by an electrical motor, which is powered from the truck on the ground. Batteries may be used, but only as an emergency measure.

Also some airplanes have a small external generator which can be used in an emergency. If you lose lots of power from engines at 40,000 ft you often have more altitude and more speed than you need (depends on where you plan to land,) and if so you can drop both and at the same time get some electrical power.

But in any case, an airplane is well provided with power, except in emergencies. A 50W here and there do not count, and besides the main cabin's lights and entertainment are the first to go if a power source fails.

Re:Dedicated turbine

[be-fan]

The thing you're describing is called an APU. It's used to start the jet engines, and to power the aircraft on the ground, but in most commercial aircraft, it does not provide in-flight power once the main engines are running.

As for scarcity, power isn't a terribly scare resource on an airplane. Remember, the engines are producing tens of MWs of power at cruise speed. Taking even a couple of hundred KWs off the main shaft to power electrical systems is not really a problem.

Re:Dedicated turbine

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't know what the hell you're talking about. Strobes don't consume kilowatts. Batteries must supply all flight instrumentation for at least 30 minutes for certification. Deicing is almost all bleed air powered. Engines need no system power to run, even with FADEC. The airplane will not fall like a rock with a total electrical failure. APU's will start just fine without any truck, at all. Gear is hydraulic, not electric. There are a few electrics controlling it, but they have mechanical overrides that allow the flight crew to drop the gear and flaps without electrics.

Re:Dedicated turbine

[tftp]

How much then the external lights take? What provides the power to fuel pumps? How the pilot is to know what RPMs of remaining engines are (kinda important if you have one or more off,) and whether an engine is already on fire or not? The airplane will not fall like a rock without any and all power only if the pilot has the gyroscopes running, the light to see them, and hydraulic pressure to operate the surfaces. Hydraulics is powered by electric pumps, not by power of will. Different airplanes have more or less of electrical control of surfaces. Deicing can be done in many ways, and air bleed is only used in one; application of alcohol based fluids is common often on the ground, but some older airplanes are designed for this method of deicing in flight as well.

All in all, completely losing power is unacceptable, but in case you lose all your primary generators the airplane gets dark fast. I do not recall for how long the batteries ought to suffice, but your figure (30 min.) is close enough to what I said. Most of the battery's power will be spent on mechanically controlling the airplane.

Re:Dedicated turbine

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

The thing you're describing is called an APU. It's used to start the jet engines, and to power the aircraft on the ground, but in most commercial aircraft, it does not provide in-flight power once the main engines are running. Does it also run the slushie machine?

Re:Dedicated turbine

[KylePflug]

There is a lot of mechanical redundancy built into these systems. Even in a GA plane you don't need electricity for crucial systems. I've flown under a total electric failure at night (Generator went belly-up). I had enough battery to run the radio and lights when I came in to land, but the point is a plane should not "fall like a rock" even with no electricity. As has been previously mentioned, most systems are hydraulic or mechanically redundant (pitot tubes for instruments, etc).

Re:Dedicated turbine

[Strider-]

Case in point is the so-called Gimli Glider. Back in 1983, an Air Canada 767 ran out of fuel, at 41000 feet, over Manitoba. Due to the Ram Air Turbine, the pilot was able to successfully pull off an unpowered landing at a former airport in Gimli Manitoba. By a sheer stroke of luck, the pilot was also an accomplished glider pilot, which is probably what kept the incident from turning into a tragedy.

Re:Dedicated turbine

[Dun Malg]

Hydraulics is powered by electric pumps, not by power of will. Dude, give it up. You keep sticking your foot in your mouth with your technical ignorance. There are indeed electrical hydraulic pumps, but they're auxiliary systems; the primary systems are mechanical and run directly off the engine accessory drive.

All in all, completely losing power is unacceptable, but in case you lose all your primary generators the airplane gets dark fast. I do not recall for how long the batteries ought to suffice, but your figure (30 min.) is close enough to what I said. Most of the battery's power will be spent on mechanically controlling the airplane. No, mechanically controlling the airplane when APU and engine power is lost is achieved hydraulically via the Ram Air Turbine. The RAT powers the control surfaces directly, and electrical systems via a hydraulic generator. Batteries only provide power for the brief time between APU/engine failure and the automatic deployment of the RAT.

Re:Dedicated turbine

[DieByWire]

What provides the power to fuel pumps?

Engine driven AC generators. If the pumps are unpowered, the engines will gravity feed (except #2 on a DC-10... it's uphill), though they will probably not have enough fuel flow to make rated takeoff power. Not a problem in cruise.

How the pilot is to know what RPMs of remaining engines are (kinda important if you have one or more off,)

Essential instruments (and the lights to see them) are on a separate bus powered by the back up battery via an inverter for a minimum of 30 minutes. On some aircraft, indefinitely via a RAT (ram air turbine.)

and whether an engine is already on fire or not?

Fire detection is always on a battery powered bus.

Hydraulics is powered by electric pumps, not by power of will.

Unless your flying a 787 (no one has yet), your hydraulics on a Boeing or Airbus are powered by engine driven hydraulic pumps. There are usually some electric auxilary pumps for various events/circumstances, but not primary flight control.

Most of the battery's power will be spent on mechanically controlling the airplane.

100% wrong. Controls are hydraulic. (Electric/hydraulic on the 380, but no battery in flight could power that.)

Entertainment systems and galleys are the first things offloaded in the event of a generator failure. The biggest risk thes entertainment system pose is fire - ask SwissAir

Reading is fundamental

[dreamchaser]

Which part of 'and there's a USB slot for importing/exporting documents or plugging in your own keyboard/mouse' didn't you get? I'd like to know that my documents won't be stored somewhere in some temp directory, personally. Security is a real issue for many business travellers.

And here's a picture of the reboot..

[Anonymous Coward]

Enjoy a few pics here. Incidentally "Song airlines" were the first ones Delta put these on. Song went out of business (there's a Frontline episode you can watch about it) and the Song planes were turned back into Delta planes. Now all the Delta planes are scheduled to have the inflight video stuff too.

Re:In Singapore

[tgatliff]

This application is also ideal for Linux. Meaning, linux is best in computers or embedded devices where you need high reliability and you want to be able to specify the exact amount of the functionality it should have. Windows CE, at least in my opinion, does not stand a chance here..

In my opinion, the best part about this is Star Office. Eventhough in reality it probably is quite unlikely many people will use it, from the vendor's standpoint, it was nearly trivial to implement... That is the true power of OSS, which is over the longterm adding allot of functionality with limited cost.

Re:Wow, so many licenses!

[Ajehals]

It wouldn't count as distribution any more than making Linux available to your employees would be distribution. The aircraft and the on board systems belong to the airline, the airline is making them available to customers, if they would let you take the machine home then it would be distribution. Even if you were using windows and the associated MS back office kit, you would only need to have licenses for each seat, not each new user, and you certainly wouldn't need to have a license that covers distribution (again, unless you give the kit away at the end of the flight..).

OT - Does anyone know when they started making you give back the earphones you used to get in flight? I remember when I was a kid that you could keep them, now you have to give them back... (not that I want them but it was a fond memory of sorts.)

The Year of Linux on the Desktop

[jon_anderson_ca]

Yeah, right... when penguins fly!

Re:The Year of Linux on the Desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

I have had it with these motherfucking penguins on this motherfucking plane!

Re:The Year of Linux on the Desktop

[BakaHoushi]

Reminds me of one of the funniest scenes from "The Critic."

"Who's flying the plane?!"
*Runs to the cokcpit to discover a penguin in a pilot hat flying it well*
"Phew... hey, wait a second, penguins can't fly!"
*plane starts to go into a nosedive*

StarOffice ?

[nsebban]

Despite what is said above, the Singapore Airlines website doesn't mention StarOffice, but MSOffice. Using Wine maybe ?

A bootup shot.

[antdude]

see here (not sure if this is fake).

Gutenberg

[WindBourne]

If they are going to include terabytes of movies, they would do well to include gutenberg for those who like to read. Perhaps even offering a web server on board so that the book can be downloaded to the personal PC. Finally, they might want to approach one of the major e-book sellers and get them to port to Linux. This way they have nearly everything covered at a cheap price.

Don't forget the RAT

[daBass]

Don't forget the RAT, or Ram Air Turbine. If all else fails, it will power enough systems to allow you to glide safely to the ground:

"A ram air turbine (RAT) is a small propeller and connected hydraulic pump, or electrical generator used as an emergency power source for aircraft. In case of the loss of both primary and auxiliary power sources the RAT will power vital systems (flight controls, linked hydraulics and also flight-critical instrumentation). Some RATs produce only hydraulic power, that is then used to power electrical generators."

Re:In Singapore

[rbanffy]

"linux is best in computers or embedded devices where you need high reliability and you want to be able to specify the exact amount of the functionality it should have."

While I would like to point out this is not about critical flight control systems (where I doubt any Linux would be certified as it costs a lot to be) and in-flight entertainment machines are OK to crash sometimes, the specific functionality is, probably, a win for Linux distros.

But, in the end, I suspect the real deal here is about price. The cheapest solution won. It would be hideously expensive to have Windows Vista PCs with Office 2007 on every seat of a jetliner.

Re:Too bad no internet right now...

[Tribbin]

I think it would be about the worst place.

Pretty sure they are logging everything during flight and you've had a thorough identification before you entered the plane.

Re:In Singapore

[jaweekes]

I really wonder if they are using Virtual machines. The ease that they can be erased and start from scratch would be handy in that type of environment, and it wouldn't matter what you did to it. It would also help in isolating the network, so you couldn't mess up all the other computers.

Re:In Singapore

[burnin1965]

While I would like to point out this is not about critical flight control systems (where I doubt any Linux would be certified as it costs a lot to be) and in-flight entertainment machines are OK to crash sometimes, the specific functionality is, probably, a win for Linux distros.

Doubt no more...

RTLinuxPro is shipping in the just released Gen4 EFIS/One glass cockpit from Blue Mountain Avionics.
"Airspeed, Altitude and VSI, magnetically slaved all-attitude compass, HSI, solid state AHRS (Attitude Heading Reference System), a 12 channel GPS navigation engine and the highest resolution 3D terrain available. There's also a built in digital autopilot with altitude hold and ILS capture, a full air data computer with fuel burn and fuel totalizing functions, a flight planning system and digital monitoring of up to 32 engine gauges. The built in flight recorder and the new flight performance software, monitors flights, engine performance and much more."

Now obviously this is not your average linux distro, but then there are many reasons one could expect to find linux used in a flight control system, one of those reasons is the robust nature of linux and its reputation for not crashing. That's not to say that linux never crashes, but in my experience crashes involve running questionable code, i.e. closed source graphics drivers and the games that require those drivers.

Re:In Singapore

[sortius_nod]

This is actually not anything big - Malaysia Airline uses Linux as their in-flight entertainment system (I only know as I managed to crash it while flying).

I suppose the big thing is actually being able to be productive mid flight. Until they start offering RJ45 sockets for me to browse the net freely on my own notebook I'm not going to be excited.

It *is* StarOffice...

[Anonymous Coward]

... but is terribly slow. I tried it on a SIA 777-300ER from Zurich to Singapore.

You haven't fully experienced mobility until...

[zaunuz]

...you've surfed pr0n at 20.000ft

What is this for?

[Tatsh]

I would still much prefer to bring my laptop (all risks recognised). I can see how non-business passengers could use these, but I see no reason why business passengers would use these over their laptops. Laptops can plug in, and they have EVERYTHING a business passenger needs, rather than just some. And since it is StarOffice, not MS Office, business passengers will hate it. Plus, businesses would be worried about the data security anyway.

I have not flew as a business passenger just yet in my lifetime, and I would still bring my laptop even if they had these on the plane. I definitely plan on not using these until they make further improvements, like including the keyboard and mouse, adding OpenOffice and Firefox, and a good set of games. If I were running this, I would have the computers reset from network image before every take-off.

Lastly, why do they not have keyboard and mouse included? They could easily have very ergonomic touchpads/mouseballs and keyboards. I know this is not too costly for them. Nobody should have to bring a keyboard and mouse for the plane, especially when there is only one USB port (oh yeah add a hub is the solution? pathetic).

Re:What is this for?

[jpatokal]

The inflight entertainment controller has a control pad for moving the mouse pointer and a miniature QWERTY keypad on the back. Sounds fairly painful for any serious writing, but better than nothing.

Cheers,
-j.

Re:In Singapore

[tgatliff]

The problem would be the video. Meaning, if you go with a thin client approach, it would be very difficult to get enough bandwidth across many devices to get at least the 15fps required... I suspect it is a blend of the two. Meaning, they have less powered computers (probably flash based) that drive the end user, and then a main file server the distributes the video data.

Re:In Singapore

[Mostly a lurker]

It would be hideously expensive to have Windows Vista PCs with Office 2007 on every seat of a jetliner.

No question, there would be some additional hardware and support costs, but I bet Microsoft would make a very sweet offer to any major airline that wanted to subject all their passengers to Windows Vista.

Re:In Singapore

[SL Baur]

Singapore Airlines is one of the best airlines in the world (I'd rank only ANA ahead of them). The last time I rode them across the Pacific I was amazed at the service their stewardesses gave. I was seated second row from a bulkhead and behind infant row and was amazed at all the attention the parents got to help their crying babies. They gave them more personal attention in an hour than an entire US carrier plane gets an entire flight.

They already offered a computer equivalent entertainment system (in coach!), but this sounds even better.

I hate most carriers and I hate flying with all the security and no-smoking crap, but in a bad environment, Singapore Airlines and their sister Silk Air do quite a nice job and Changi Airport is *sweet* as International airports go.

The Singapore government may have issues with some, but all my experiences with Singapore have been positive. Reading this makes my day.

Re:In Singapore

[burnin1965]

they felt the need to virtualize that Linux-based OS under an RTOS.

More specifically, RTCore provides the Hard Real Time interrupt and thread handling as RTlinux alone is only Soft Real Time capable. But make no mistake, RTlinux is not used as an in flight entertainment system in the EFIS/One.

The following paper has a good description of what RTCore is and does for RTlinux.

http://vir.liu.se/~TDDB72/rtproj/reports2006/04-v2 -oskhe171steho564-RTLinux_VxWorks_scheduling.pdf

How to crash at 27,000 feet

[WereRaven]

If I Wine do I get a Windows seat?

Even more data leakage..

[cheros]

I would suggest you have a good look at the %temp% location of a PC in a cybercafe to see just how easy it is to leak confidential stuff. Few are aware that looking at a document online means you leave a pristine copy in %temp% when you walk away..

Not in a gazillion years for anything sensitive, IMHO.

Re:In Singapore

[rbanffy]

They could easily subsidize the hardware required to run the system. Airlines would even demand they pay for the extra fuel the heavier computers would require ;-)

They could also go the thin client with beefy server route. Maybe not as good for a in flight entertainment system, but good enough for browsing and emailing.

But they will probably wait until people (read: their astroturf teams) start complaining OpenOffice is not Office and refuses to read their MSOOXML files before they announce their move that will "save" the airlines from the headaches of the previous system.

Never underestimate neither their weaseliness nor the depth of their pockets.

Had to talk them into a reboot!

[Erris]

I love this comment:

After we landed in Orlando I talked the flight crew into rebooting the entire system so I could take this picture.

Despite the hostile shake rattle and roll environment, you know they mostly reboot when they want to not at random. Notice how it was not a big deal for them to oblige the picture taker? They knew all of them would come back up.

Re:In Singapore

[dave420]

Comparing it with Windows CE is a bit flawed - you should look at Windows XP Embedded. You can pull anything out of the install you want, add anything you want, and make a version of Windows that is anything from just a command prompt through to MS Office, Windows Media Player or DirectX-capable games machine. You specify what drivers you want installed, and it spits out an image perfect for burning to CD or booting from across a network. I had a decent XP install on my PC that was about 100MB. It allowed me to do everything I wanted.

Re:HUmmm, obligatory...

[Yoozer]

You mean a Beowulf flock ;).

Do they know something we don't?

[raju1kabir]

I am a little worried that this is a result of Singapore Airlines management knowing something that the rest of us don't - namely, that it won't be long before laptops are banned from the passenger cabin for "security" reasons.

SQ is already the preferred airline for most business travelers who fly their routes. After this, they'll be able to lock up the rest, providing at least a usable means for productivity to business travelers who would otherwise have to sit on their hands the entire flight.

Re: fedora

[heinousjay]

May I inquire as to why selling software is evil?

But can it run MAME...

[FauxReal]

...off a USB stick? Cause that would be awesome. And if I could bring my own mp3s and movies too... oh boy!

Re:In Singapore

[Anonymous Coward]

"While I would like to point out this is not about critical flight control systems (where I doubt any Linux would be certified as it costs a lot to be)"

Open Source operating system are used more than you think in avionics. A real time version of OpenBSD is used in military aircraft, for example.