Slashdot Mirror
FAA Permits American Airlines To Use iPads In Cockpit "In All Phases of Flight"
hypnosec writes "American Airlines has announced that it has received permission from FAA to allow its pilots to use iPads in the cockpit during 'all phases of flight.' According to the airlines, the tablet will enable pilots to store documentation in electronic form on the iPad which otherwise weighs 15.876 kg (35 pounds) when in printed form. Use of the digital documentation will enable the airlines to save as much as U.S. $1.2 million of fuel each year." That number sounds both awfully low and awfully specific.
Have you ever seen the reams and reams of paper in 3 ring binders that comprise the low and high route maps that a pilot must have on hand, as well as the approach plates needed to do a proper landing?
No reason this should be restricted to apple products as an android tablet would work just as well to view pdf files, but still, very reasonable savings estimate.
"Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
I worked for a startup that designed a tablet-style device to hold flight manuals and maps for airliners. That was back in 1996. The device was bulkier than an ipad but did not weight 16Kg, and had a respectable 800X600 color display. I'm pretty sure tablets and/or laptops have been used since then in the cockpit - so the news here is proabably that the FAA approving yet another device.
See? I knew it was okay to use electronics during takeoff and landing! The pilots are using them!!! SEE??!?!!
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
It's the rolling bags of charts they have to carry with them whenever they fly. There are regulations that specify what charts they have to carry; all in all, a "Jep Bag" is about 35 pounds, and both pilots carry one. If they're using a Electronic Flight Bag app for the iPad, that's a pretty straightforward conversion of mass and very specific savings.
I love vegetarians - some of my favorite foods are vegetarians.
So when can I start using my iPad during "all phases of the flight"?
sudo make me a sandwich
Unless safety never was an issue.
Ding ding ding ding ding!!!
We have a WINNER!!!
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
If the iPad is not charged then obviously they... plug it into the outlet i the cockpit and charge it. And how exactly is their offline documentation going to get 'hacked'? And how would it be any more of a problem then someone maliciousy changing their printed documents?
In related news Andriod devices are not allowed in the cockpit becuase Apple has a patent on "using handheld electronic devices in a cockpit".
I'd hate to think of a pilot realizing his fuel tank is running low on fuel just when he needs to perform a critical maneuver (like not crash).
I wonder how the heck they solved that problem?!?!?!
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
The best argument I've heard for the "real" reason you aren't allowed to use electronics during takeoff and landing isn't EMI or any other "technical" reason. It is because the crew wants two things. 1) Less distractions for the passengers. If an emergency were to arise, they want your full, undivided attention. No one saying "what was that? I was listening to Beiber". 2) Less items flying around in the event of a bad landing/takeoff. Accidents happen and an iPod at 200 MPH can probably ding you pretty good.
The backup plan is you ask the ATC. Ask a pilot. Even "couple hours training" noob like myself knows that. Its considered extremely bad form to tell the ATC "I'm too Fing lazy to look up the approach plate, whats the ILS freq again?" but if you have an equipment breakdown they have procedures and policies in place for generations now to help you out.
As for plane docs, it doesn't really matter as long as the ipad is highly reliable. You use the same checklist over and over to make sure you don't forget anything... its 99.999% good without a checklist (literally) so once or twice is no big deal.
There is some truth that the ipad will probably be more up to date and less likely to have a page torn out or coffee dumped on it than paper. It'll likely be more reliable as a system, even if it doesn't degrade smoothly.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Power outage - well, if the plane's running on batteries, I think you have a bigger problem than worrying about following the approach plates in the iPad. And I'm sure the cockpit can have neat little things called 'charging ports' so your iPad can be charged from aircraft power.
Though, for the vast majority of flight, the ipad will sit in the flight bag unused so as long as it's reasonably charged (more than 10% battery - which would give roughly an hour's worth of usage, which is plenty for most flights).
Virus - well, ATC systems often use Windows, and those are a touch more vulnerable than say, an iPad. We are talking walled garden here after all (and "jailbreaking" is a pretty foreign term for them).
The *interesting* thing is the iPad, while there are a few aviation apps (ported from iOS) for Android, it seems the vast majority concentrate on iOS, and the iPad specifically (very little for the iPhone).
The aviation world has gone nuts for the iPad, primarily because an iPad with an AHRS system (total cost under $2000) can serve as a pretty good GPS system with a larger screen and better battery life. It beats having to retrofit a glass cockpit in your plane (if one's available - you're looking at easily $50k+ all in), a penel-mount GPS unit ($10k+), and cost-competitive with many handheld GPS units (around $2k). Except the iPad can also help you file your flight plan, do flight planning, and has a larger screen (and is more user (pilot) friendly). About the biggest complaint is the inability to use it with gloves.
You should check out the aviation mags from around 2010 or so - they all went ga-ga for the iPad and possibilities for pilots. These days, reading those mags you'd think every pilot uses one.
What I wanna know is: If saving a few pounds adds up to so much fuel then why aren't they weighing passengers and charging them accordingly? How come an extra bag costs me $50 but the 350lb guy pays the same fare as a 120lb guy?
No sig today...
and even extra pilots (ever notice that fat attache case they carry?)
Not sure if serious...
What documents could they even be carrying that are considered critical/vital for a safe landing?
The ipad breaks. ... low and slow and you can use cell phones on a plane just fine... Cell network can't tell difference between my Cessna 172 at 1000 feet and 60 knots from my car on the side of a 1000 foot hill at 60 MPH... Yes, I know, its not gonna work well at 35000 feet and 500 MPH, but then again you don't have much to worry about up there.
The paper printouts of both the pilot and copilot get coffee dumped on them (at least some pilots I know like to plan flights on their desktop PC and then print out neatly annotated paperwork specifically for their flight.... the charts for some airport 100 miles away are for emergency diversion use not daily flying)
Then the pilot's phone breaks (lots of pilots have a charts app on their phone)
Then the copilots phone breaks.
Then both redundant comm radios break so they can't ask ATC for help (This doesn't scale if no one ever carries plates and everyone pesters ATC for every little detail every time, but a 1 in a billion accident in a crazy scenario is perfectly scalable...)
Then they're too low on fuel to fly that triangle pattern (I forget the exact shape but its the pattern that means holy shit I'm lost please send me an escort)
Then the mode C transponder fails so they can't change the code to emergency thus getting themselves an "escort", but the mode C failure isn't noticed by ATC who naturally think the plane just crashed so they scramble everyone over to look at you. So this is a weird situation... maybe if the transponder and its circuit breaker had superglue sprayed all over it?
Then the "sat phone" system fails so they can't call the tower phone or any other person in the entire world who has charts
Then every single cell phone on the plane fails
Then the landing lights have to fail so you can't communicate with a tower via morse light flashing. SOS landing lights will get them all wound up..
Then the built in GPS which also usually has charts and data has to fail (admittedly, usually no NOTAMs...)
Also the pilots hand held GPS has to fail (lots of pilots have a GPS stuffed in their flight bag, right next to the flashlight) and the copilots.
Then bad weather over a large area has to roll in so they can't simply go VFR approach and just eyeball it (gonna be a rough, but probably safe, landing)
There have to be no other planes in the air to follow or get attention of..
The compass and a couple primary flight instruments and the clock all have to fail so they can't dead reckon their position (like over the ocean or something)
Well, lets say both pilots are new to the area so they can't rely on memory.
There's probably a few other things that have to break that I haven't thought of before a ipad failure will take out a plane. Then again if more than a dozen other things listed above all also have to break simultaneously its hard to give JUST the ipad all the credit for crashing the plane.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Hi, I work with the FAA, including on projects involving Electronic Flight Bag research and testing.
Aeronautical charts in the US have a 56-day publication cycle. That means every 56 days, your paper charts are (possibly) out of date and should be replaced. Usually they're not, as most things DON'T change from one cycle to another, but there are always changes. So if you follow the approach procedures for a terminal in your flight bag, you may be following incorrect procedures, which at the very least is going to make ATC grumpy and in a worst case scenario could seriously impact safety. An iPad based solution means up-to-date charts can be loaded in seconds during pre-flight, instead of manually having to replace possibly dozens of individual manuals located in a heavy, bulky bag. Twice, since both pilots are required to have a copy.
So, while as a "professional researcher," you can probably feel secure in the knowledge that the ten-year-old mass spectrometer you're working with can be safely used with the manual that came with it ten years ago, the same thing is not the least bit true in the aviation world.
That being said, I'd much rather an up-to-date electronic manual, even for older hardware. Every manual has errors in it which can be hopefully corrected in future revisions...
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
What I wanna know is: If saving a few pounds adds up to so much fuel then why aren't they weighing passengers and charging them accordingly? How come an extra bag costs me $50 but the 350lb guy pays the same fare as a 120lb guy?
The paper manuals are not likely to complain, boycott or sue for discrimination. That's why.
The checklists shouldn't be going anywhere. Disclaimer: I dont fly for AA, but I did fly for another airline. The pilots carry docs and the plane carries docs. The plane should have at least 2 checklists and a quick reference handbook, in printed form, in the cockpit. The checklists cover all normal procedures for all phases of flight. The QRH has all of the abnormal checklists. The absolutely vital emergency procedures are printed also in the QRH but the primary source is the pilots memory (things that need to be accomplished ASAP before there is time to consult the book).
What the electronic flight bag (EFB) is going to replace is the junk the pilots carry. My flight bag had 2 2" binders full of nothing but approach plates, a 1" binder with our hub airport approach plates in it, a 1" foldout thing with all of the enroute maps, a 1" binder with the company flight ops (essentially 14 CFR 121 plus whatever opspecs the airline has approval for), a 2" binder with procedures and checklists (serves as backup for the checklists and QRH that the airplane carries), a 2" binder with our collective bargaining agreement in it. Not carried was another 2" binder that were all of the details of the aircraft systems, it was not required to be carries and there just wasnt room for it. The EFB replaces all of that into a tablet form factor.
On a typical flight the only things in that bag that get touched are the high enroute chart I need, the airport diagram and company page for the departure airport and the approach plate, airport diagram and company page for the arrival airport. The checklist used is the laminated one that belongs to the airplane. If there is an abnormal, the QRH belonging to the airplane is consulted (in conjunction with other docs on the airplane: the MEL book and the logbook).
Actually, the main reason for the whole "seat backs up, tray tables closed, put away your portable electronics" rule is that the takeoff and landing are the most dangerous parts of a flight, and if something goes wrong, people need to be able to respond, need to not be distracted, and need to not have extra impediments to moving within the cabin.
For in-flight, the ban on cellular phones is actually technical in reason: each cell tower can only handle so many connected devices at once, even if they're not actively communicating with the tower. Cell phones use line-of-sight frequencies, which means that on the ground, any given phone is only going to see (and consume "slots" on) a handful of towers. In the air, every phone that's turned on will blanket a huge number of towers. For one of two phones this doesn't matter at all (so yeah, turning on your phone in an emergency is fine), but if people didn't turn their phone radios off, every passenger in every plane over a given city would be adding to the load of every single tower.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
Damnit, I had mod points yesterday.
I agree with your points and just wanted to add one more thing. There are documented cases where a passenger's consumer electronic device was verified to cause interference with one or more of the plane's systems. The crew located the passenger with the device, had them turn it off and saw that the problem went away. Then, for good measure, had them turn it back on and the problem reappeared. This is proof via the scientific method that it is possible for a device to interfere with an electronic system in a commercial aircraft, and frankly that's enough for me.
I'm a private pilot who, prior to learning about the event I just described, was also a strong believer that the ban was more to keep passengers from annoying each other than it was about safety.
I imagine these would be "controlled" iPads, updated by the flight management staff of the airline. They are running a specialised app from Jeppesen, who have benn producing flight charts for ever, so I should imagine it probably has a custom and controlled update system.
Just because they use consumer equipment, they don't have to use it in the consumer manner.
Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
I've designed avionics and radios for aircraft. We didn't just care about a few lbs, we cared about everything down to the weight of the gaskets that sealed the antenna mounts.
Hell, I remember having to verify that the mass of the gas capsule for the lightning arrestor device was not included in the overall mass of the device itself. The manufacturer of the lighting arrestor didn't even know and had to refer to their engineering drawings to be sure. I think it ended up being something like 0.1-0.2 ounces.
Every ounce you shave from the aircraft is an ounce of fuel you can carry, or a fraction of fuel you don't have to burn. Over many thousand flights and many thousand miles, it adds up.
Let's put it this way, if you went to UPS and told them that you could eliminate 0.5 miles from the routes their drivers take, you would have a multi-million dollar idea in your hands.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
Actually, the main reason for the whole "seat backs up, tray tables closed, put away your portable electronics" rule is that the takeoff and landing are the most dangerous parts of a flight, and if something goes wrong, people need to be able to respond, need to not be distracted, and need to not have extra impediments to moving within the cabin.
So why it it ok to read a bulky 30 ounce, $30 hardback book during takeoff/landing, but a 6 ounce $60 Kindle has to be put away?
And yet they have no rules against a person sleeping during these times, or talking to the person beside them. They also do not try to stop people from reading non-electronic material.
The "distraction" excuse is a bunch of B.S. It's paranoia based on concepts that have been obsolete for at least 2 decades.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
I guess Apple will just start to comply to all standards concerning aeronautical grade software and hardware and perform common cause analysis to avoid this from happening. I'm sure Apple is concerned with our safety.