Typhoon is to be received Large Area Display (LAD) Cockpit upgrade by 2024

[F-2]

On 12/13/2021 at 12:17 AM, Mr_Burns said:

When I started work the EFA2000 had CRT displays, children that is Cathode Ray Tube (Cathode-ray tube) an old technology which was not more advanced than the first production televisions I think, perhaps a few less valves!

We upgraded them to AMLCD, Active Matrix LCD.

I have been out of that business for many years no so not sure if they are still the same Smiths Industries (GE Aviation) units or something different, I do recall hearing much smaller and therefore lighter units were developed but perhaps someone else may know.

Now they are looking at touch screen tech, single wide displays, awesome!!

By any chance do recall the resolution of the AMLCD screens?

[Spectre11]

575x575 pixels

On 8/4/2022 at 12:42 PM, Zahnatom said:

maybe also good sound design. i could imagine there being some audio feedback unless thats too distracting ofc.

A visual feedback would be less distracting I guess. Like on the touch screen of smartphones, some waterdrop like symbology. Maybe only actioning the touch when the finger leaves the surface, to allow for corrections, in case you missed the right spot at the first time. Enlarged screens will surely help and maybe some HOTAS support as well.

[Rick Mave]

I like it. Bet you that changes the entire workflow on the aircraft for the better.

[Rick50]

 

The downside is that such a display "looks like azz".

The upside  is that one button press could make the display look AMAZING.

Another button could make a super-informative display with ALL the situational awareness you'd ever want.

Another could give you a tuned set of displays appropriate to specific moments during a mission profile.

Best of all, it probably has a LOT of pilot-chosen display options to choose from. Nothing stopping anyone from making the entire dash look like an early retro EF2000... DID people, call yer office!

[Mapi]

If we wait another 2 years, then please do that straight away:

Large Area Display (LAD) Cockpit

[Mateo]

To be honest, if a step forward will lead us to such cockpits, I will make one step back or even two to WW2 series of airplanes... 

 

[Rick50]

On 12/13/2021 at 10:43 AM, Dragon1-1 said:

I don't think I like the "flying Ipad" trend. The loss of tactile feedback could be a problem in long run. Admittedly, they probably also have full control by HOTAS cursor, so even if touchscreen stops reacting to touch, you still have some way of interacting with it, but still, I'd worry about reliability of those things. If it's one giant display, if it quits, you've basically lost all flight instruments. I really hope the display system isn't a single point of failure for the aircraft.

 

Hmm... if losing the giant display, not only have you lost ALL your instruments, ALL you tactical situational awareness, ALL your nav data... ALL your stores data, all weapon data, all threat displays, all datalink displays... you'd be resigned to just RTB if that's even a possibility at that time. 

 

...  but you've also lost MOST of your buttons and controls that aren't on the HOTAS system...

 

I'd almost advocate for a second redundant screen behind the one that just failed and ejected... but I don't really see that happening. 

 

I guess you'd be down to just HMD and HOTAS if your main display dash fails...

[Dragon1-1]

1 hour ago, Rick50 said:

you'd be resigned to just RTB if that's even a possibility at that time. 

If you can make it, you'd do it by luck, and probably not in IMC, because without the LAD, actually selecting the point you want to fly to and enabling ILS is probably difficult, if possible at all.

I'd hope that there are HOTAS options to, at least, get the aircraft home if the LAD suddenly decides to go blank. Losing tactical systems isn't too bad, because you're not really fit to fight if you lose even one MFD in a more traditional cockpit, it's not quite as bad, but you generally want to get home ASAP anyway. The biggest problem with LAD, IMO, is loss of engine instruments (particularly fuel flow) and the fuel indicators, robbing you of all means of endurance calculation. Other than that, the HMD can display enough information to keep the aircraft flying mostly straight and in the right direction, if you can select the home plate by HOTAS.

[Rick50]

 

Modern FADEC should be able to give you set programs for endurance, or cruise efficiency per mile on  their own without pilot intervention. Particularly for a super advanced fighter of today. Have a solid button on the side console, press and hold for 3 seconds and it illuminates a color to indicate it's mode, different color for another mode.

Modern nav systems, should be able to get you right to the runway, much like a cruise missile, and the data from SIDS STARS systems. Precision GPS could do the same job as an ILS, and or ground personel on a data link could select the ILS frequencies for you. Or maybe you have a dozen preprogrammed ILS freqs, and a wheel knob on side console to pick one. When it shows in your HMD, you are golden.

One auto nav mode might be a stealthy exfiltration back the way you came, thus not compromising the missions' return path. A different mode might be "fast and direct as possible" in case an interceptor is on it's way to  you. A third mode might be "sip fuel limp mode" for maximum fuel efficiency if you are leaking or just low on fuel, might be enough to get home, or at least enough to get to a CSAR pickup point!

Although the  pilot wouldn't see it, the data link could come in very handy in such a situation: other airforce personnel could monitor your sensors and systems, and give commands to the pilot, or command systems and sensors directly. It would suck in many ways, delays due to network, but it could save the pilot, the airframe, ... maybe even save the mission. Think of it like the pilot is now just a passenger mostly, but now has a dozen guardian angels flying with you, watching over you, setting up AIM-260 shots, doing IFF for you, monitoring ground and air threats, steering your headings, getting  your HARM or JDAM set up and fired.  Think of it like: this WAS a manned fighter, now it's mostly a UCAV or "loyal wingman" that happens to have a human in it, with eyeballs for a HOBS shot and landing short final. The caveat is that this would need a monster of a datalink with super low latency, a dozen ground personnel that are super competent in a team, in enough numbers, who don't already have many dozens of jobs and tasks in time sensitive situations.

Another possibility: if helmet mounted displays ever get full color in insanely high resolution, maybe all that data could be just displayed in helmet... lower quality than the dash display that has now failed, but maybe good enough to fully continue the mission.

This does all make me wonder about modern airliners though... if such a screen fails mid-flight.

 

Edited July 14 by Rick50

[Dragon1-1]

On 7/14/2025 at 5:52 PM, Rick50 said:

Precision GPS could do the same job as an ILS, and or ground personel on a data link could select the ILS frequencies for you.

It can't if it's being jammed. This is another crucial failure point of many modern systems. This is also the issue with using the datalink: what if the enemy manages to jam it? GPS jamming is fairly straightforward, it's easy to degrade it to the point it can't be used for landing or PGM delivery. With datalinks, it depends, but reliability of a high bandwidth system in a hostile EW environment will be suspect.

All the other suggestions rely on another system that would have to be added (and cost money). I would propose a minimum fuss, minimum problems solution: display the data in simplified form on the HMD. You don't need a full color high resolution map, just enough to get the jet home. Fuel and remaining time could be displayed by pressing a button, that alone would improve the situation somewhat. That alone would allow proper fuel planning. In general, in case of an electronics failure, you want to give control to the pilot, not to more electronics.

On 7/14/2025 at 5:52 PM, Rick50 said:

This does all make me wonder about modern airliners though... if such a screen fails mid-flight.

An airliner is in a better situation because it doesn't rely on a single screen. Having two crewmembers, it usually would have at least two displays. This gives it a basic measure of redundancy a fighter LAD lacks.

[Q3ark]

Don’t you think the design teams and engineers have been through all this? It’s fun to imagine what would I do in their shoes but these people know what they are doing. When is the last time you heard of a screen failing in an aircraft? This isn’t new technology any more. 

[Dragon1-1]

That it isn't new doesn't mean it can't fail. In most aircraft, an MFD failing isn't a huge deal, so it doesn't go in the news, they just fix it before the next flight. The LAD hasn't been around for very long, there are probably some contingencies for a total failure, but I'm not sure how well they'll work in practice. Of course, it also helps that fighters are flown much less than airliners, when we consider the total flight hours.

I'm a bit worried that the engineers, while they know what they're doing, might have different priorities than we'd hope. "It's cheaper that way" mentality had caused a few aviation accidents over the years. The LAD is nice because it's cost-effective, you've got one screen, no buttons and minimum maintenance requirements. Of course, the F-35 has an ejection seat, which probably affected the calculation as well.

[Rick50]

10 hours ago, Q3ark said:

Don’t you think the design teams and engineers have been through all this? It’s fun to imagine what would I do in their shoes but these people know what they are doing. When is the last time you heard of a screen failing in an aircraft? This isn’t new technology any more. 

 

Parts on fighter jets fail all the time. That's why they are "hangar queens"... I seem to remember the F-15A was noted to require 15 hours of maintenance for an hour of flight, at least back in the 1980's, not sure about today. And that was dead simple compared to the flying fighting supercomputer "do every single airforce job there  is" multirole jets of today. The engineers making these jets DO indeed know  what they are doing, but the role of even a simple fighter jet is demanding a LOT more strain on materials that make up a jet, than your Chevy or my Toyota. We ask and expect a great deal more of fighters, than our regular vehicles. 

It's not just parts breaking though, it's  also inspections to look for signs of airframes being pushed near or past their limits, looking for signs of invisible cracks using NDT methods. A general rule of thumb seems to be that at any given time, military aircraft will have only 2/3's of the fleet up and ready for combat, the 3rd is either in maintenance or inspections, or awaiting parts. Rich and ready nations might have better and faster maintenance and parts supply, but then they probably also have much more complex aircraft with many more systems needing to be taken care of... huge maintenance difference between an F-5E and an F-22, due to more sophistication and the stealth coatings that need to be repaired and maintained too.

As for screens failing in aircraft, sure, in civilian aircraft it does happen, but rarely. I'm no engineer, nor even in aviation, nor airforce during my life, but we are mostly focused in this thread about fighter jets with a single giant screen... and subjecting these to high G's seems to be a fairly new thing. I expect they've been tested extensively, and should have a high "survivable duty" rating. I just thought it interesting to explore the benefits of such giant screens for fighter use, then the rather significant downsides to using a  single large screen, and then  explore ways that engineers and airforces might find solutions and workarounds to save the day, save the mission... or maybe just saving a pilot and the fighter for repairs!  I imagine all of this has been gamed out, then engineered with lots of solutions, but I've seen many  times  in the real world, where such things were forgotten, not even considered about "what happens if...", only to discover some pretty major problems not even dreamed of. But really I just thought it an interesting thought experiment!

[Rick50]

15 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

It can't if it's being jammed. This is another crucial failure point of many modern systems. This is also the issue with using the datalink: what if the enemy manages to jam it? GPS jamming is fairly straightforward, it's easy to degrade it to the point it can't be used for landing or PGM delivery. With datalinks, it depends, but reliability of a high bandwidth system in a hostile EW environment will be suspect.

All the other suggestions rely on another system that would have to be added (and cost money). I would propose a minimum fuss, minimum problems solution: display the data in simplified form on the HMD. You don't need a full color high resolution map, just enough to get the jet home. Fuel and remaining time could be displayed by pressing a button, that alone would improve the situation somewhat. That alone would allow proper fuel planning. In general, in case of an electronics failure, you want to give control to the pilot, not to more electronics.

An airliner is in a better situation because it doesn't rely on a single screen. Having two crewmembers, it usually would have at least two displays. This gives it a basic measure of redundancy a fighter LAD lacks.

 

Agreed! 

Good points raised.

On the one hand, PGM delivery has been jammed quite hard in that area of conflict... though seemingly not at airfields. But in future, be it this conflict or others not started yet, commando jamming behind enemy lines will almost certainly become a real problem for some adversaries. Even at "friendly airfields". Maybe with scheduled "shut downs" for PGM deliveries, but then sparked up again to disrupt enemy comms, datalink coordination, and so on.

I think that between sporadic GPS signals, INS, triangulating of known fixed radio broadcasts (FM music radio towers, VOR's, cell towers, NDB's) might all help to give a decent enough "position fix" to put you close enough to a friendly airfield that you could get the ILS signal... which could be displayed on HMD... Then there is StarShield, which might offer everything one needs to get home. Maybe.

 

[Dragon1-1]

Relying on any single system opens you to that system being targeted. If StarShield becomes an essential component of the US military technology, the first thing potential adversaries will do is develop ASAT weapons capable of taking the system out. You can't prevent satellite overflights of any given territory, including enemy ASAT sites so there's no good way, other than putting active defenses on the sats themselves (driving up mass and cost) to make sure they won't get shot down. For constellations, killing one sat will create a debris cloud that could damage the others, making this a massive risk. In fact, this is one reason why Reagan's Star Wars program didn't go anywhere.

INS should be enough to get home, at least with enough accuracy to get a visual on the airfield, or an ILS fix. However, there needs to be a way of setting up the ILS and enabling it without using the LAD, not to mention stuff like switching waypoints and taking INS fixes.

[Mapi]

"satellite overflights" ?

we have no one in DCS or?