Slashdot Mirror
US Air Force Buys iPads To Replace Flight Bags
redletterdave writes "Following the precedent set by commercial airliners, the U.S. Air Force plans to buy up to 18,000 iPads for its Air Mobility Command (AMC), replacing heavy flight bags with light and efficient Apple iPad 2s for the crews that fly cargo aircraft. The devices will reportedly be used by the crews on the C-5 Galaxy and C-17 Globemaster aircraft. There are several benefits to using electronic flight bags instead of physical versions. For one, the iPad can instantly update charts electronically, while the AMC would require flying charts get reprinted every 28 days to stay up-to-date. By cutting publication printing and distribution costs, and exchanging 70 pounds of paper for a 1.3-pound iPad, the Air Force can save some serious cash, including more than $1.2 million worth of fuel per year."
But printed charts and manuals don't have an 8-10 hour battery time ...
What about when they have to turn them off when the flight door is closed?
The people who have been sniffing around Apple's supply chain say that the iPad3 will have a 2048x1572 screen, etc ... so why not get the iPad2 cheaper, or get the iPad3 for its better display, etc.?
Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
They should probably keep paper around, even if it isn't updated as often, as a backup.
It's going to suck to have nothing when your batteries die or the software fails.
$1.2M of fuel seems like a drop in the bucket for the amount of birds they keep in the air, and one falling out of it is worth far more.
Sent from my PDP-11
So that is what "Airplane Mode" does.
they use Android tablets.
Each iPad saves them ~$67/year, or $330 over 5 years, by which time they'll be utterly outdated. I know this is a drop in the ocean cf. the military budget, but it is through tiny leaks like this that the ship sinks.
Wouldn't an e-reader like a Kindle be much more suitable for this, and be much less expensive? Battery life would be 10x better too, which is a big concern when you're dealing with something important like documentation for military hardware!
Well, unless the USAF is paying $66.66 per iPad, the cost of the things alone (not to mention associated costs) far outstrips the fuel savings. Of course, they're going to re-purchase these things very, very frequently (as Apple averages only a few years of support per gadget), so there's no telling how much money, time, and possible operational problems, this bonehead move is going to waste.
I don't respond to AC's.
Wouldn't a device with e-paper (Kindle, Nook, Sony Reader, etc) be a better replacement for books? Those devices have no glare, have all of the benefits listed, and all have a longer battery life.
Since you really want to replace hard copies with something that runs on a battery, you could at least go for something that gives you at least access to, say, its file system. Or something for which you won't pay extra just for the logo.
Data entry device.
Yuck. Going back and forth between number and alpha keyboards on screen nearly caused a riot. I had to code custom on-screen touch-keypads to allow speedy, painless data entry. Nice as a readout device and OK with some interation, but be wary of using one for data capture.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
TFA specifies once that in truth, they are looking at tablets, not just iPads. Than it's back to Apple this and iPad that. If it indeed is a forgone conclusion, they should have explained why. That's some mighty fine journalism, there. Also, they mention iOS isn't certified yet; don't know if any tablet is.
And no, the cost wont add up over the years. Maintenance and replacement cost is greater than 1.2 million per years. Granted 4 years device lifecycle with lifetime warranty, the real cost is 12 million per generation, so 1.8 million per years more than paper.
However, there is improved flexibility and efficiency. But saying it will save cost is plain wrong.
You can always wait for the next version, but at some point you have to actually make a purchase.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
I guess $1.2 million could be considered serious cash. I mean, if you multiply that by a factor of about five thousand, you're up to 1% of the US military budget.
Lt. Col. Glen Roberts, clarified the report, stating the commend "is looking for a tablet device, not necessarily an iPad"
Seeing that there is custom DoD Android edition and clearances, where iOS has not . http://www.bgr.com/2011/12/28/pentagon-approves-android-device-for-department-of-defense-apple-still-awaits-clearance/ . There is even a DoD SDK.
But one thing about the Air Force there are different commands and they all make different decisions . ASFOC will make one decision, AMC another and the ANG another, and they never cooperate, costing tax payers millions.
sure, the ipad is a great way to replace paper. but clearly someone's forgotten what the flight bags are for. there are a few beautiful things about paper -- it's always there, it has zero dependencies, laminated it can withstand more than the human using it, and absolutely nothing can go wrong with it. it just can't break.
so since these things are consulted when the plane breaks, two engines die, and the power is out, it's nice to have the redundancy be a completely different technology.
so when the ipad hangs, is there tech support mid-flight? remember, paper has zero tech support requirements.
These are more for diagrams and maps. e-paper is best for text only.
The military decided on Android for phones but iOS on tablets? They should try being more consistent...
that is ONLY the fuel costs... it doesn't include printing and distribution savings...
Granted 8 years device lifecycle, the cost is half that. Granted 2 years, it's twice. This is either brilliant or stupid. I hope someone is promoted or fired for this.
Well, I'm not an aircraft engineer (either ground or flight), but I really don't remember 120v 60hz AC service routinely available on most military aircraft I've flown in. The stuff I've seen is 120 Vac at 400hz or 28 Vdc. I suppose a multi-billion dollar program to retrofit all these AMC aircraft to include US household current on the flight decks of the current transport aircraft inventory wouldn't be all bad...
Like most other gadgets, the iPad can charge off of a USB port. That would be 5 Vdc.
Send Foxconn deactivation code in 5, 4, 3, 2... Wonderful. What next? iMissile from China? What could possibly go wrong?
Does Apple actually make a MILSPEC iPad? If not, what are their plans for what to do if the "big one" finally happens and all consumer electronics are fried?
In particular, any computer needs to be built in the west, with chips from the west, to be trusted.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I work in the corporate aviation side and deal with EFBs on a regular basis, including iPads. EFBs are nothing new, and the iPad certainly isn't the first such device on the market - in the past they have been mostly Windows tablets. The main benefit of iPads is the ease of use and support. Windows based EFBs are a support nightmare just like any other Windows machine (user malfunctions mostly), and the iPads make this much easier as they are fairly idiot-proof.
And that's where the benefits end. They simply are not designed for the rugged environment of a cockpit and flight crews tend to be about as dainty as gorilla. My biggest complain is the proprietary connector - it's weak, flimsy and breaks easily, and then is a challenge to replace as it is not a standard connector. The screens are decent for 'consumer grade' devices, but sunlight readablitly is not as good as some of dedicated EFB products out there. I'm also not aware of any 'Made for iPad' devices that allow interfacing with a ship's avionics to acquire weather, flight plan and position data as we do with Windows tablets.
Now I hate Windows EFBs with a burning passion, but I just don't think iPads are appropriate for professional aviators. We've been supporting them in the field for less than a year and they are simply not holding up. IMO a rugged Android tablet with appropriate Android Open Accessory avionics interfacing would be a much better solution, but I don't know what is out there to this end. Everyone wants their iPads and doesn't care to hear about anything else...
In keeping with established tradition, my company has still not provided the promised EFB (electronic flight bag). we have been told literally "any day now" since 2004. Many studies, prototypes and vendors have been examined, but finally, as of October 2011, a commitment was made to procure the iPad. The new promise was November, then mid-December. And still... no device. Current issue is regulatory and infrastructural. At any rate, the advantage is mostly one of convenience. For someone with near vision issues, it will be very helpful. But the real gain will be that the paper won't have any more coffee stains on them. What it will not provide is depiction of aircraft position, but that may actually be good as you'd want one source for that- on-board navigation. Some of the relevant issues: *Who's responsible for equipment (if stolen, broken, not charged, etc.) *Can we use it below 10000' (not trivial to FAA) *How will data be updated (do I provide access to server or company) *can the device be incorporated as "aircraft permanent equipment" *can I watch porn on it or jailbreak/root it (of course not) *can they monitor what they do with it (not unless required by law, but they certainly will...)
Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?
I don't get it... how does one vomit into an iPad?
So what does this tell the enemies of the US airforce? That they can ground cargo operation with directed EMP. The ipad isn't EMP hardened, so a single EMP burst will deprive the pilots of all charting and mission planning. What a great way to shut down US airlift capability! No body would have bothered in the past because US military planes are EMP hardened so you couldn't kill the plane. But now with the advent a consumer electronic device for charts and mission plans you have the ability to shut down all mission information.
Even if the USAF get a good deal on the iPads at say 500 bucks a pop, 18,000 are going to set them back $9 million dollars. By the time they make up the costs with the $1.2 million in fuel per year, everyone is already on iPad 4.
"Lt. Col. Glen Roberts, clarified the report, stating the commend "is looking for a tablet device, not necessarily an iPad."
WOW! That sounds like a great new slashdot story!
Adapters for 28V dc aircraft environments already exist: http://www.lonestaraviation.com/Power-Adapter-USB-Socket.html
I don't pretend to know much about EMP hardening, I assume the built-in electronics are built to withstand the effects, but I also assume that the whole outer skin of the plane is shielded?
If that is the case, which I am only suggesting, is it not likely that the tablet inside the cockpit would also be shielded by the fuselage?
Missed Opportunity.
For both BlackBerry and their "professional grade" but too-small PlayBook tablet, and for E-Ink and their lack of color devices on the market. To be fair, there is the jetBook Color which is targeted at the educational market... but it's the only one and I doubt anyone has made any additional aviation apps for it. Too bad they couldn't have leveraged their branding for the aviation market.
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
Really? Slashdot is going to argue over whether the military can figure out how to charge an iPad on a C-17? Really?
but 18k iPads cost at least $9M. Who expects an iPad to last eight years in an environment as harsh as cargo planes?!
So will flight gloves work on the iPad screen, or are the operators going to be pulling their gloves off and putting them back on every time they want to see or look up something?
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
I ask this respectfully towards the aviation buffs and the actual service members, but in reality, is that fuel savings estimate reasonable?
I've talked to a couple of Navy vets who will quietly admit to having to dump many many loads of fuel at the end of the quarter so they can have empty tanks when it's budget-time again. So assuming the Air Force does this too, can the fuel really be accounted for in such a way?
A bit of turbulence and they'll all be on the floor... screens smashed. Apple stuff seems so fragile. If I had a dollar for every smashed iPhone I've seen...
I would have thought this kind of functionality would be provided through specialised mapping software on the navigator's console.
My other account has mod points!
$1.2 million saved on fuel? I wonder how much those iPads cost. Assuming retail 16GB Wifi only iPad 2's, that's $499 x 18,000 = $8,982,000.
Yeah, a great "savings".
If these are the 3G models, the iPads could cost well over $10million. Even at $2million savings/year, the break even point is 5 years. By that time, the iPad batteries will not hold recharge, and they'll have to be replaced.
What about the energy cost of recharging the iPads abd the fuel cost of producing the iPad?
...with a very basic but important caveat: battery life. Or do they simply dock the thing once they get to the flight deck? As to cost; for the doubters among you, let me ask you this: how much does the USAF spend on paper to update the charts every month? Inks? Printer maintenance? If all is done electronically, and the pads have SSD or SD storage, then what's the total cost of maintaining the system? Very little: keep the cartographers on, move them to computers if they're not on them already, hence removing the requirement for intermediaries for AD conversion, ditch the printers, stop buying paper, and every pad is updated either wirelessly or with the simple insertion of a two Dollar memory stick. Flight crews are happy, the office is happy, the cartographers are happy (though the print shop might not be), the trees are happy, and Congress is happy that notwithstanding an initial outlay running upwards of 10 million bucks, long-term savings are sweet considering the USAF has never broke even on a project yet.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
I had a hard time believing they'd go for an iPad over a more rugged device, but the article says Special Operations Command already did so. iPads are consumer hardware. From Apple's specs:
* Operating temperature: 32 to 95 F (0 to 35 C)
* Nonoperating temperature: -4 to 113 F (-20 to 45 C)
* Relative humidity: 5% to 95% noncondensing
* Maximum operating altitude: 10,000 feet (3000 m)
Even for a cargo plane, that seems pretty limited. I know they have at least some climate control in flight, but don't they park the planes in arctic and desert environments too? Don't they need the checklists before they start the plane up? Or do they keep them running all the time and only shut down at their home base?
Visit the
http://iase.disa.mil/stigs/net_perimeter/wireless/u_apple_ios_4_gms_iscg_v1r1_20111020.zip
the Air Force can't fly.
Why doesn't the military buy generic tablets with decent specs and create their own custom Android ROM. This would ensure safety, keep cost down, and avoid the gianormous closed-source monopoly known as Apple.
I just had a talk about this with my dad over the weekend. He's considering ditching his flight bag because he found out that Jeppesen had a charts app for the iPad.
The pro argument is exactly what is presented in the article. Instead of having to lug around the four or five bags that it now takes to hold all the charts, you've got this nice, tight little package with access to everything. There are clip adapters to attach the iPad to just about any yoke where the charts would normally get clipped, and you avoid having to unfold, spread, smooth, refold, unfold, refold, stow, etc.
On the con side, it is an electronic device, which means it is going to crash and the battery will run out, which is something you never have to worry about with paper. If you're on approach and you're at somewhere even mildly complex (not to mention spaghetti bowls like Midway or LAX) there is no lag getting the data off the paper chart. You don't have to touch the screen to wake it up and you can glance over at your co-pilot's chart to make sure you're both looking at the same thing. With the iPad, you could both have different views and that could cause issues. It is also possible to write directly on the paper charts, which can come in handy when there are temporary approach changes.
Of course, like most things new, about half of the pilots you talk to hate the idea, the other half love it. The younger ones tend to be more willing, while the older ones tend to be more resistant.
I'd have thought that barfing on an iPad is much messier than barfing in a paper flight bag?
I believe the Apple adapter that comes with the iPad is 2 amp, the normal usb port is 0.5 amp. 2 amp aviation oriented adapters exist.
"ATTENTION iPad USERS:
Please be sure to select the 2 Amp USB Model to ensure proper charging."
http://www.lonestaraviation.com/Power-Adapter-USB-Socket.html