Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Air Force Buys iPads To Replace Flight Bags

Posted by samzenpus on from the brand-new-bag dept.

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."

24 of 348 comments (clear)

  1. Battery by Picardo85 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But printed charts and manuals don't have an 8-10 hour battery time ...

    1. Re:Battery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's OK man - they can spend $1.2 million recharging them!

    2. Re:Battery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you don't have electrical power in your plane you got much more serious problems than to worry about a dead iPad battery I believe.

    3. Re:Battery by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Great opportunity for the Chinese government to backdoor via Foxconn, etc.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    4. Re:Battery by idontgno · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're not an Air Force veteran, are you?

      Yeah, it's actually quite reasonable to question whether the issue of battery life and providing mains power in an airplane has even been considered. It's fairly routine for system acquisition agencies to overlook little technicalities like this.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    5. Re:Battery by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They can probably keep them powered while they fly. MY concern would be that some glitch (or an EMP from solar storm, or something) would cause them to fail, in which case the only real backup is... a paper chart. Which would mean they have to buy charts anyway, and won't actually save any money.

      Maybe they think having 2-3 of them on board at a time constitutes "backup". Who knows? All I know is that I'd want a paper chart to be there. Just in case.

    6. Re:Battery by lightknight · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously. Perhaps it is just a fantasy I've held since I was younger, but I would have thought the military would have developed their own systems, designed to survive Armageddon. The thought of a military officer touting an Apple iPad into battle is a little...strange; I mean, they are cargo aircraft, but still. All we need are some Hal-branded headphones, and Twitter-enabled position locators, and the image shall be complete.

       

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    7. Re:Battery by limaxray · · Score: 4, Interesting

      1) EFBs typically run on ship power during flight
      2) An aircraft will have at least 2 EFBs in operation at a time - pilot and copilot. Some aircraft have a 3rd EFB for a center screen.
      3) Many of the dedicated EFB tablets that have been in use for years are powered by NiMh batteries (out of fear of Li-Ion) and last less than an hour on a charge. Since they rarely run on batteries, this has not been much of an issue to the best of my knowledge.

    8. Re:Battery by Loadmaster · · Score: 5, Informative

      The C-17 has plenty of standard outlets on-board. There are two at the Load station and outlets every couple of feet above the sidewall seats. Plenty of outlets to be had.

      I know, because I was a C-17 Load.

      You know what it didn't have? A fucking microwave. Had a convection oven but no microwave.

    9. Re:Battery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's four, dude.

    10. Re:Battery by mirix · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you want to do it in the most horribly inefficient fashion, yeah, that will work.

      Shunt regulators really suck for anything other than minuscule amounts of current, for a reference as example.

      A shunt reg has to burn more than just the voltage drop (the extra in the zener, to keep the voltage level). It has to be sized to draw slightly more than the device's maximum draw at all times.
      So - say full load on the ipad is 2A, idle is 1A. We design this to draw say 2.2A, a little room so it doesn't drop out on peak - so we're burning 28V * 2.2A = 62W all the time, while the ipad is getting 5W average, or 10W peak (out of the 62W).
      8% efficiency at idle. 16% at full load.

      A better setup is a normal linear reg (which can be made up of discrete parts, or integrated like the venerable 7805), which will basically only burn the drop (there is a small amount for ref, but basically negligible)
      So 23V drop * 1A draw = 23W burnt. total consumption 28W.
      ~18% efficiency at idle or full load (this one is linear..)

      Typically you wouldn't do this though, you'd use a transformer off the AC supply (assuming their is one) to get the voltage into the ballpark, then rectify and reg, to get efficiency up over 50%, maybe as much as 80% with decent design and low dropout reg. (transformers are heavy and bulky though - which is why planes use 400Hz).

      SMPS is of course, the best, some modes exceeding 90% efficiency - but that didn't always exist. A lot of old military transceivers used dynamotors, which is the most efficient non-transistorized way to do DC-DC conversion. kinda... funny in a way, so very primitive, but also sort of genius. brute-brilliance, i guess... Heavy, loud, and high maintenance, though.

      guess i rambled a bit much... hope it helps.

      --
      Sent from my PDP-11
    11. Re:Battery by MacTO · · Score: 4, Funny

      Uh, this is an Apple product we're talking about. Of course they will be touting it in battle. And the enemy forces will probably kill the American soldiers to put an end to the Apple evangelism.

  2. Flight door... by Nittle · · Score: 5, Funny

    What about when they have to turn them off when the flight door is closed?

  3. E-paper by jader3rd · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  4. Re:They should wait a few more months by grouchomarxist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have you actually gone through the military procurement system? They probably ordered these when the iPad (1) was announced.

  5. Tablet, not iPad by clickforfreepizza · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  6. NOT a iPad , a tablet by bongey · · Score: 5, Informative
    iPad != tablet

    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.

  7. Not books by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 4, Informative

    These are more for diagrams and maps. e-paper is best for text only.

  8. Re:Hrmm.. by Gordonjcp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have to say, it reminds me of the comment an ex-Signals guy doing his amateur radio licence at the local club made, along the lines of "a map with a bullethole in it is a map that's still mostly accurate, but a laptop with a bullethole in it is really just too big to be a useful paperweight"

  9. Re:iPad can charge off of USB ... by bennomatic · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think the point is that if there are any power ports available--and I don't know if there are, but if they are--it shouldn't be difficult to make an adaptor that can peel off 5V DC and spit it out of a USB-shaped plug.

    --
    The CB App. What's your 20?
  10. Re:iPad can charge off of USB ... by perpenso · · Score: 5, Informative

    So, go ahead and find me a USB port on the flight deck of a C-17. I'll wait <crickets> I thought so. ...

    Did you forget that *you* wrote that 28 Vdc was available.

    ... Whatever they're doing to keep their pads charged beyond normal battery endurance, it'll be a workaround hack (issuing external USB-connected battery packs along with the pad) or some significant auxiliary systems re-engineering of in-service military transport aircraft.

    Or it will be a simple DC/DC converter, simpler than the AC/DC converter that every iPad already ships with.

  11. Aircraft 28V dc / USB adapters already exist by perpenso · · Score: 5, Informative

    Adapters for 28V dc aircraft environments already exist: http://www.lonestaraviation.com/Power-Adapter-USB-Socket.html

  12. Really? by MikeMo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Really? Slashdot is going to argue over whether the military can figure out how to charge an iPad on a C-17? Really?

  13. Re:They should wait a few more months by Curlsman · · Score: 4, Funny

    They ordered Newtons...