• AnarchoSnowPlow@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    4 months ago

    It doesn’t, that’s just a very common reaction to these types of articles. I recall having some very intense discussions around stuff like iPads in cockpits. I’m on the “not a fan” side, but I’m also not making avionics software anymore either.

      • AnarchoSnowPlow@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s not the iPads themselves, it’s the addition of Bluetooth and/or wifi to support them. I agree that they can alleviate a lot in terms of paperwork reduction etc. My issue is the additional exposed surface.

        • deranger@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Wireless isn’t a requirement and connectivity seems slow to be adopted anyhow according to this source.

          https://www.aircraftit.com/articles/data-connectivity-for-efbs-part-2/

          If we agree that connectivity is a good thing, why has the adoption rate been so slow?

          The first required piece is an actual connection between the device and the airplane. This connection can be wired or wireless. It’s now possible to have a wireless access point that’s dedicated to the crew. A wireless connection will need to include security capabilities so users can prove their identity to the wireless network. Let’s not forget that security must also be practical for in-service use. A wired connection is generally seen as more secure, since there has to be physical access from the flight deck, which is considered a secure domain.