Hacker News Reader

Comment by Gare | Hacker News Reader

This actually makes sense from maintenance/reliability perspective.

This doesn't pass the smell test at all. There are multiple redundant CDUs and I'm not aware of any reliability issues with their keyboards in the countless other aircraft models which use them. And I second everything @etskinner just said above.

It's 100% about programmers wanting to make everything software defined.

I really doubt this was made because a programmer asked for it. It's likely way cheaper to manufacturer than the part it replaces.

And it makes no sense from a usability/safety perspective.

Touchscreens are harder to hit buttons right when you're being jostled about by turbulence. Not to mention how easy it is to hit the wrong button even when there's no turbulence. Have you noticed how liberal all smartphones are with autocorrect lately?

Also the fact that with a set of switches, if one doesn't work, it doesn't affect the others. Touchscreens seem to fail all-or-nothing, or at least have large areas suddenly become unusable.

The flight deck of the Airbus A380 widebody airliner must be the most comfortable and ergonomic in existence, with a full laptop-style QWERTY keyboard for each pilot and two additional mini QWERTY keyboards on the center pedestal. There have also been no fatal accidents on the type; maybe the well-designed cockpit has something to do with that.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Airbus_A...

Not really. It's a cost-cutting measure. Keeping the old UI lets them pretend it's the same plane as the original model from the 60s and pilots don't need training.

My keyboards last longer than my touch screens, with the exception of that crappy patch Apple masterminded a few years ago.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com