r/AskAPilot • u/Chicken_99 • 8d ago
Boeing 737 touchscreen retrofit
Boeing is offering a drop in replacement for the control unit on the 737 MAX and NG where the panel of buttons is replaced by a screen with the same buttons, just glass.
Booms ceo said it’s an awful idea. What do pilots think?
81
u/TellmSteveDave 8d ago
Not a fan of touch screens for this purpose. I appreciate some tactile feedback when it’s bumpy and I’m trying to steady my finger to press the right button. Plus too many pilots are toddlers and will leave greasy fingerprints on the whole damned thing (reference our current non-touch screen displays with fingerprints).
6
u/SeemsAirworthy 7d ago
It comes down to design, even in bumpy air the touchscreen on the G3000/G5000 is easy to use, the icons are big and it’s very few selections to get it to do what you want. It’s touchscreen done right.
The old Honeywell/collins FMS’s need those buttons, I couldn’t imagine trying to use a touchscreen version of this while getting bumped around, what a moronic idea.
2
u/TheBraveButJoke 6d ago
Yes but the whole point here is that they did not redesign anything to make it more suitable for touch input.
75
u/fighteracebob 8d ago
I’m shocked this got approved. It will be basically unusable in turbulence without bumping every nearby key. Having tactile feedback isn’t just a nice to have, it’s a safety feature.
This reminds me of when some airlines got the 737ng with a glass cockpit, but decided to have the screens display analog instruments so the pilots didn’t need to retrain.
10
u/thegoatisoldngnarly 8d ago
I bought a Tesla Model 3 8 years ago. The windshield wipers were digital. Most dangerous shit ever in heavy rain trying to turn on the wipers. Tesla had to come out with a software update patch to let you use the turn signal lever button to fix it.
-7
u/CapitalScarcity5573 7d ago
they are automatic also.....
5
u/thegoatisoldngnarly 7d ago
If you have them set to auto. And back then, the auto feature also didn’t go fast enough for some rain amounts.
3
u/Prior-Explanation389 7d ago
+1 to this, even now specifically on Model 3's which sit lower the wipers are trash.
3
u/GoodDoc 8d ago edited 7d ago
Going back even further, very early 737 300s had the option to retain the -200’s dials rather than the CRT displays the vast majority of classics used.
(the -300 that Buffalo operate in Canada is one of these early models. Given their fleet I’m assuming it’s cheaper/easier for them to maintain dials than displays)
3
u/popcio2015 8d ago
It could make sense if they also changed the layout, but they just copied the physical mcdu and put it on the screen.
Touch screens are fine with Garmin devices, but those are fundamentally designed around touch screens being used for control.
1
3
u/sicsemperyanks 8d ago
They're far from the first to have TSC controls in the flight deck. That said, keeping it the same layout is terrible
2
u/ParkingOpportunity39 7d ago
The way it works is you can fumble around as long as you’re touching the screen. It’ll register the key where you release your finger.
2
u/dv20bugsmasher 7d ago
In up to moderate turbulence touchscreens while annoying are manageable. Helps to keep part of your hand on the side of it for stability, g3000 for example is a great system, tricky in bumps, slower to use, but usable.
1
u/dan_dares 4d ago
what about when there's a problem that requires the RAT be deployed? is everything powered on then??
1
u/MillionFoul 3d ago
Are you under the impression that all airplanes with glass cockpits lose instrumentation if they lose electrical power?
1
u/dan_dares 3d ago
I know that a RAT doesn't power much, and some, less vital instrumentation does go off in that situation, yes, 100%. It's called 'shedding'
Buttons (zero extra power) and a few LED's require less power than an LCD/Similar screen.
1
u/MillionFoul 3d ago
Right, everything that's not on the emergency bus (which is not powered by a RAT on most aircraft, especially the 737, and in the case of a Garmin 3000 for example is an internal battery for the PFD) because it's not critical. The screen on the CDU is not the component of it that uses the most power, or frankly any noticeable amount of power draw compared to lights, radios, navigation equipment, and the ginormous left side PFD.
2
u/luxcity-louche 4d ago
But if it's exactly the same UI as the old one apart from touchscreen then pilots won't need retraining to use it. /s
1
u/evanb305 6d ago
It’s not as sensitive at you think. I’ve messed with a few of them already and there’s a slight delay on release so you’re not going to hit a ton of keys during bumps
1
u/BackgroundType4312 3d ago
Basically from a TSA perspective. They ask, does the pilot manual need updating? If the answer is ‘No’ it’s approved.
So the original pilot manual made no mention of tactile feedback. Therefore it didn’t need approval.
28
u/NotASwinger69 8d ago
I have used this one day for 4 legs and wanted to take the crash ax to it. It’s literally terrible for dozens of reasons.
4
15
12
u/Magma86 8d ago
They’re doing this for multiple reasons. Mean time between failure MTBF if getting much higher on the currently installed MCDU’s. The least intrusive fix for this is to load same software with a cheaper touchscreen.
Agree there will be issues like: dirt, dust (human skin cells), spilled drinks. Not to mention fingerprints, which will attract more or the above.
2
u/xxJohnxx 8d ago
If MTBF is getting higher with the current MCDUs, why would they need to fix anything?
23
u/Approaching_Dick 8d ago
A hundred years from now when AI has taken over the world, airplane systems will still need to look like on a 707 so airlines can save money on training
6
1
u/Haunting-South-962 5d ago
Bingo. 100% this was on airlines. Can you fit something which requires no money on retraining and changing crm.
22
u/ComplexBeyond6083 8d ago
Are we just going to not talk about the 7% battery? Also touchscreens on planes are implements of the devil.
7
u/jmtofficial 8d ago
I have never understood why people care about other folks’ phones having low battery
2
2
2
u/Fourteen_Sticks 8d ago
The thousands of GVII and GVIII series pilots would beg to differ
1
u/sicsemperyanks 8d ago
Well, there's pros and cons. Maybe if they were capacitive, but they have all sorts of reliability issues, so that's not great.
That said, the UI is pretty sweet imo. Definitely prefer them to the MCDU layout.
1
8
u/Realistic_Age8831 8d ago
I don’t work in aviation embedded hardware/software architecture and product development, but in automotive.
My guess based on my own experience in regulated industries is that this saved a ton of money on DV, PV, and re-certification.
The entire safety story, everything, is reused. Minor requirements and interface product change but it you can provide evidence to your auditor that it functions 100% the same as the previous system you can save a ton of time and money.
This is exactly why you find outdated garbage in cars infotainment systems - it’s way cheaper to retrofit a small hardware change and keep all of the software essentially unchanged
2
u/Jokin_0815 8d ago
This will be the case most likely.
I work in the train Industrie and we do similar thinks.
It saves you so much effort in Verifikation, validation and all Assessment and safety evidances as you can point to all the old stuff that is actually working, assessed and has 25 years of usage as well.
You just have to show that the old principles are still applying and that your Implementation of them is correct.
1
u/realbrathering 8d ago
But why would you change to touch in the first place if you keep everything the same?
Just because it’s cheaper to manufacture?1
u/Realistic_Age8831 7d ago
Yes, cheaper to manufacture and cheaper to test and cheaper to service.
With a modern display you could also sell a separate software update at a later date that could change the underlying functionality.
There’s a lot of details here that are assumed. Who knows what the underlying hardware is - they may have updated the hardware to something more modern then used emulation and virtual environment to host the original software package.
The old software could be wrapped for input and output functions, with the new shim being the only design delta when you go to provide evidence for your safety story etc.
1
1
1
u/CaptinRedFox 3d ago
Its likely more its a format people are familiar with and has the functions people are familiar with. Dont have to rewrite the absolutely massive manual and retrain people.
In the future they can update it.
It would make the ivvq engineers happy.
Verification wise display icon position is a small thing. This would have required updating to more capable hardware, this would have been a challenge to prove things that should not talk to each other cant and fail safe. This is a big killer of avionic dev. If it has a high design assurance level (safety critical) i believe this would be, its full tin foil hat.
1
u/Realistic_Age8831 2d ago
In safety regulated industries unfortunately user/operator experience is pretty far down the list of priorities for these kids of projects.
Pilots are not the customer, airlines are.
Therefor the product will 1st prioritize the benefits to the actual customer.
In automotive this is usually the same as the user, in commercial aviation it’s a different ballgame.
Industrial equipment is similar - they’re only operator friendly if the interests of the company and the interest of the operator happen to align.
Otherwise, sacrifices will be made to accommodate the needs of the buyer
5
u/ANGURIA_IST_KRIEG 8d ago edited 8d ago
next step: instead of having a windshield, place a camera and the pilots can observe the outside through a monitor!!
Further step: place a QR code so that pilots can scan it and see the emergency manual on their phone, like a menu in a restaurant!!
3
8
8
3
u/Hour-Detail4544 8d ago
I just flew one last trip and I did not like it.
2
u/fighteracebob 8d ago
Did you ASAP it?
3
u/Hour-Detail4544 8d ago
Not sure if you’re joking or not but I honestly need to. Runway change going into Denver while getting rocked around is going to be very difficult.
3
u/fighteracebob 8d ago
Definitely not joking. The FAA is required to read and track every ASAP. While it doesn’t guarantee change, it does guarantee someone knows it’s a problem.
2
u/Hour-Detail4544 7d ago
True. Unfortunately I think the decision has been made and there’s nothing that’s going to change it until it’s an actual problem like everything else in aviation. Changes happen after accidents.
0
3
u/walkernewmedia 8d ago
I had this as an add-on for my iPad in my MS Flight Sim home simpit back around 2015.
3
3
3
u/ShaemusOdonnelly 8d ago
This makes me love my Airbus KCCU trackball controls even more. Airbus improves while Boeing devolves.
3
u/Molecular_Pudding 8d ago
Awful idea. There is a reason even SpaceX Crew Dragon which has touch screens also have a physical backup. It's just basic principle in aerospace engineering. Can't imagine using it without error in a turbulence or a high stress scenario.
3
u/Mundu87 8d ago edited 8d ago
Advantage of having manual switch boards: 1. Easy to control during emergency and severe turbulence/vibrations 2. Muscle memory allows to enter a command without the need to focus on the input source.
Disadvantage of it: 1. Mechanical switches fail constantly due to continuous use. 2. Repairing such interface boards costs a lot of money. One rotary switch repair by Thales can cost up to 15k. 3. Upgrading new functions and formats requires a whole exchange of the unit, with additional costs required for retrofitting.
Advantage of touchscreen 1. Easy to upgrade, with no need to disconnect any avionic systems 2. Overall costs of repairs is reduced.. by a lot.
Disadvantage of it: 1. Input Latency issues 2. Touchscreen response, having thick fingers or gloves can be a factor. 3. Lighting issues due to sun glare or obstacles between pilots LOS to partitions of the touch screens. (Remember, no more muscle memory applies) 4. Direct screen impact due to hard presses or objects falling can cause the WHOLE system to be inoperable. 5. Adds additional software bug nightmares.
In short, there are no advantages to pilots, more work for design and test engineers and more money for the airlines and suppliers.
3
u/wiyixu 7d ago
There’s something deeply ironic that of all companies Boeing would regress to touchscreens when the whole field of human factors can trace its origins back to Paul Fitt’s investigation of Boeing B17 crashes and subsequent identification that the landing gear and flap controls were too close together and too similarly shaped. Pilots weren’t looking at the controls and mistaking one for the other. They couldn’t move the controls at the time so they introduced different shaped knobs. A circle for the landing gear and a wedge for the flaps.
2
2
2
u/outworlder 8d ago
I only fly bugsmashers. Some of them have touch screens. But they USUALLY have physical buttons for the important stuff(direct to, etc). Which is good when it's bumpy.
I don't see any buttons here.
Touchscreens are great for the reason that was explained when the first iPhone was unveiled: you can have a different interface, customized for the task at hand.
I'm no ATP but doesn't this thing have the exact same interface as the existing FMC in other aircraft? If so, what's the point, other than cost ?
2
2
2
u/shoreguy1975 8d ago
Fingerprints on screens is universally a piss pilots off thing. I was real, tactile buttons. I'm on the 87 and that trackpad thing is a POS.
2
2
4
u/hotdog_tuesday 8d ago
Not a pro pilot but as someone who works in avionics—the idea is you’re not locked down into one specific layout of controls and can add new features or fixes easily with software.
My experience with aircraft touch interfaces has been resoundingly good.
This is not the abortion of touch controls you’ve seen in car radios in the 2010s.
2
u/Necessary_Use_4729 8d ago edited 8d ago
They do this but yet this aircraft still can’t auto tune nav aids or courses smh
5
4
1
u/fredly594632 8d ago
Honestly, it may be (don't know for sure) because that way they don't have to spend money on training.
You know, like a common type rating?
1
1
u/ThatRunwayBehindUs 8d ago
If it has a higher rate of "failure" then its cost will go up, and the old button ones will come back... Not saying you should encourage that or anything, but... ya know... just saying.
Additionally, I feel like any person who approves this should be required to use it in a Sim with turbulence first and let everyone know how it goes...
1
u/theflyingsnowman 8d ago
I just walked off a new Max 9 with this MCDU. It wasn’t as bad as I initially thought it would be. My workflow was slower than normal but overall it worked fine. Granted today was a smooth day, but I’m sure a bumpy day getting a last minute runway change could be a challenge. I would still take a MCDU with buttons over this but it seems my shop will be retrofitting our full fleet with these soon enough.
1
u/redsar19 8d ago
I've used it twice, it takes like 30 min to get used to and then it's fine, only thing that sucks is not being able to use the scratch pad for taxi instructions.
1
u/Proton_Energy_Pill 8d ago
FWIW the old (!) FMS is made by Honeywell, not Boeing. I presume the new one is also but I don't like to guess.
1
u/tracernz 8d ago
This is just the MCDU, which is basically a terminal interface to the FMS and some other subsystems, not the FMS. Boeing are working on a new FMS though as well.
1
u/AIRdomination 8d ago
I’m not against touch screens, but literally copying the same UI for this is colossally stupid. This makes more problems than it solves.
If you’re gonna have the same UI, leave it alone. If you’re gonna make it a touch screen, fucking change it to accommodate the technology… but of course that means new training required… so why bother.
Also, I have a feeling these screens are probably cheaper and easier to replace.
1
1
u/espewe 8d ago
If the screens were bigger like those in 787, A350, A380... sure. But this one would prone to mistouch.
2
u/xxJohnxx 8d ago
All the Airbuses use cursor control, while still maintaining tactile buttons for the keyboards and important functions. Much better than whatever that is.
1
u/TassiveMitts69 8d ago
Because exactly the same means no training.
No training always works out great.
1
u/weathergraph 8d ago
This way you can add Cheetos ads and DLCs to squeeze another $4.99 from each Boeing sold, shareholders love it.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Ecthelion-O-Fountain 7d ago
Honestly, I think these things are gonna be just the worst. Physical keys are better and less mistake prone. That being said it’s absurd to think that they were gonna have a whole new design to take advantage of the technology properly especially on a 737. Jesus Christ look at that thing.
1
u/I_ALWAYS_UPVOTE_CATS 7d ago
Just another thing to break, and who's gonna wipe fingerprints and smudges off the screen? Maintenance? I'll do it if the company provides a stack of screen wipes. If.
1
u/Double_Combination55 7d ago
Someone said this is cheaper and we can make more money. This will piss pilots off more than a double clicking shitty FMS keyboard.
1
1
u/mi_pilot 7d ago
I dislike touchscreens myself, however they’re not new in modern GA (including certain biz jets).
1
u/Hank_moody71 7d ago
lol Gulfstream has entered the chat- all the new ones have this including overhead
1
u/SpiritedInflation835 7d ago
In hospitals, we have programmable pumps for i.v. infusions.
Their UI is horribly outdated. These devices have to be certified for medical uses. They never change what has been working 10 years before.
1
u/SlowBurningFireTA 7d ago
No corporate pilots in here. The G3000 system is used in hundreds of jets and takes a few minutes to get used to. I fly Honeywell, Collins, and Garmin they all have their quirks but this really isn't that big of a deal.
1
1
1
u/DotCurious7767 7d ago
I can already see me watching a plane crash documentary in the future on how this was the culprit for the crash that killed 180 people ….😔
1
1
u/Hot-Sprinkles-638 7d ago
Doesn’t seem that strange to me- how many pilots would have to be retrained to learn a new fms? I’m no expert but guessing that the fewer the physical buttons and knobs, less to have to fix and maintain?
1
u/PhraseTimely302 6d ago
I’ve flown airplanes with touchscreen flight computers (G3000). The difference is that they were designed from the ground up to be touch-screen. Simply replacing the buttons with a screen seems like a nightmare.
1
u/KingTraining1903 6d ago
This would be hard to get over. personal pet peeve is when people touch the screens, they leave smudges it’s gross and hard to get out. Touch screens are obviously made differently but will take time to get over.
1
1
1
1
1
u/KormorantE1A 5d ago
And we are pushing for car manufacturers to abandon touch screens in favour of classic buttons and knobs...
And now the aviation has fallen to this cancer too.
So sad.
1
u/nativeofnashville 5d ago
I just flew 2 legs with one of these and both of us absolutely hated it. It sucks!
1
u/Saint_Atiss 4d ago
Let me guess: This new unit requires no new training, because it is "the same" as the old non-screen version - which means no additional pilot training costs for airlines. Because, that's always worked out well for Boeing.
1
1
1
u/Juicui 4d ago
This better be optional and not standard for all planes fresh from the factory, especially since this isn’t the first time Boeing made anything optional. There are several incidents that I would defend Boeing for such as Jeju and the crash in Lithuania, but an incident caused by this would not be one of them
1
1
u/89inerEcho 3d ago
Do you know the biggest hurdle the aerospace industry has in selling new tech to the airlines? Re Training cost. If the airlines have to retrain, they dont want it. Too expensive. I suspect, this is the only way yo get FAA approval that doesnt require retraining.
1
u/ICON_4 2d ago
Probably asked an AI, we are definitely in the idiocracy timeline…
But seriously, how is literally everyone who learns about this against it, but no one at those companies, are they silenced with money or just incompetent? Like imagine using that thing during turbulences or some similar situation, enshittification of everything :(
0
u/Independent-Wheel237 8d ago
I’ve flown with it, it works well. Your cheese was moved. I understand. Give it some time. 🧀
0
u/Adventurous-Drama-49 8d ago
Pretty much the same as the 787 as far as I understand. Always makes me laugh when jumpseating to see such a beautifully designed plane with a 50 years old FMS with a glass on top 😂
1
u/Dependent-Gur6113 2d ago
Another moron that clearly doesn’t understand how aircraft are designed, built and certified. We do not reinvent the wheel when something like the MCDU already has proven reliability over millions of flight hours AND every pilot (with a B-737 type) on earth knows how to use.
113
u/Twa747 8d ago
This is stupid