FoxHoundELite Posted October 27, 2014 Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) it's seem fighters in the future is starting to upgrade with an advanced big MFD display screen,for example:F-35,F-18 Adv Super Hornet and next is Gripen NG,in contrast to traditional several seperated MFD screens,which can found in current fighters .I always wonder which one is better?personally i would go with traditional MFD screens :) Into the future Just like old time So how about you guys? Edited October 27, 2014 by FoxHoundELite Feel the Rush of Superior Air Power [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
outlawal2 Posted October 27, 2014 Posted October 27, 2014 One large screen makes sense to me. With one large one you can split it up into 2,3,4 however many different displays as the pilot wants and he/she can decide how they are layed out... Also, if you select a display such as a map for example, now you have one very large display so the amount of information and detail can be far greater than a small display such as the A-10 has... Much more flexible and easier to upgrade as you only need to change the software during upgrades.. "Pride is a poor substitute for intelligence." RAMBO
tomcatter Posted October 27, 2014 Posted October 27, 2014 I see it as an improvement. I do sound engineering, almost always I do big festivals and tours, and from many years now we use digital mixers, and lately they are operated only from big touch screens, and it is a big advantage in work flow and flexibility compared with the old analog mixers. But one crucial thing is redundancy, is not unusual to experience problems with them, sometimes because the heat, or the dust, sometimes software problems, like double commands with just one touch, and sometimes a zone inside the screen don´t want to work for some minutes. So a great step, but if you have one big and nice screen with a lot of useful functions that you are not allowed to use for serval seconds or minutes, you are really in troubles..
cichlidfan Posted October 27, 2014 Posted October 27, 2014 But one crucial thing is redundancy, is not unusual to experience problems with them, sometimes because the heat, or the dust, sometimes software problems, like double commands with just one touch, and sometimes a zone inside the screen don´t want to work for some minutes. So a great step, but if you have one big and nice screen with a lot of useful functions that you are not allowed to use for serval seconds or minutes, you are really in troubles.. Different manufacturing standards. Have you ever looked at an industrial grade laptop? :) ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup:
tomcatter Posted October 27, 2014 Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) Different manufacturing standards. Have you ever looked at an industrial grade laptop? :) Yes I did because in my work, my laptop is a very important piece of the sound system, usually the control core. I also answer your question with another question: have you checked the screens of a Midas Consoles XL8 or a Digico SD7? Those are no toys, those are very expensive pieces of hardware designed to travel around the world and work in very hard conditions for very long times, and to be very, very reliable. Can you imagine a band saying to a 30.000 people crow that they can´t perform the show because the mixer doesn´t work? :thumbup: Edited October 27, 2014 by tomcatter spelling
Basher54321 Posted October 27, 2014 Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) Yeah the bigger display gets my vote - move the windows to different places or out of the way - much better - could have the TGP view full screen as well. Its a good point about the delay - basically a combination of Solid state memory, better or more CPU/ RAM - or the contractor needs to optimize the crap codeing!! Edited October 27, 2014 by Basher54321
Emu Posted October 27, 2014 Posted October 27, 2014 Into the future So how about you guys? For that one in particular the old displays looked clearer.
Neon67 Posted October 27, 2014 Posted October 27, 2014 more display is better: if your big screen has a failure, you are screwed. Rule of redundancy for an aircraft
outlawal2 Posted October 27, 2014 Posted October 27, 2014 Viewing angle, distance from monitor, camera quality etc. all play a part and can skew the final picture... Unless you are sitting directly in front of and using both sets of monitors, you can't possibly make that kind of statement... At least not credibly anyway... "Pride is a poor substitute for intelligence." RAMBO
outlawal2 Posted October 27, 2014 Posted October 27, 2014 more display is better: if your big screen has a failure, you are screwed. Rule of redundancy for an aircraft And that is handled by making that one big display actually multiple displays that can be configured in multiple ways so that if one or more of them go out you can reconfigure the remaining for whatever purpose you require... "Pride is a poor substitute for intelligence." RAMBO
FoxHoundELite Posted October 28, 2014 Author Posted October 28, 2014 An impressive set-up. indeed,very clear and clean cockpit Feel the Rush of Superior Air Power [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Eddie Posted October 29, 2014 Posted October 29, 2014 more display is better: if your big screen has a failure, you are screwed. Rule of redundancy for an aircraft If the "computer" and/or data bus driving your 2/3/4 displays fails, you're "screwed" as well. And that's far more likely. And as has been alluded to, a single display can be made from two or more display panels side by side much like a multi screen setup for your home PC. Redundancy is only really a significant issue for flight safety critical aircraft systems, not mission systems. Provided the aircraft has a backup system, which would be entirely separated from the main display and it's controllers/power source etc. then there is no real problem. You don't have redundancy for every system on an aircraft, especially when it comes to avionics. And if the failure rate for your single display is low then the advantages to mission effectiveness far outweigh any risk associated with failures.
Recommended Posts