Why can't you just modify existing display software to accomodate this, instead of investing in Google Glass?
There is a display. It's often broke, and is an old, specialized part. It's also not at all conveniently located for the guy actually giving the commands. You could modify the display, but do you have any idea how freaking hard(and expensive) it is to make any kind of shipboard change the "right" way?
How do you get Google Glass and SRPM/pitch to 'talk' when the ship is not built to wirelessly transmit that data?
Too easy. Either tap the data stream to wirelessly transmit or just mount a camera. You can rocket surgery it or redneck engineer it.
Can't possibly fix this by modifying training? If surface ships use similar CCS as us, couldn't they just speak in relative bearings just the same, especially since the CCS can easily display both values instead of making the OOD mentally calculate the difference?
Sure, but seconds count when you're engaging fast boats. This one's a bit far fetched anyway, I was really thinking of a GCO taking control of a CIWS and other Remote Weapons Systems (25mm) like an Apache pilot does with his gun. Not likely but would be cool, would make things better. A CIWS gunner tying his video feed to make sure you shoot THIS boat not THAT boat from a topside controller's feed would be an intermediate step.
I can't speak for Navy wide, but in our community if a Sailor is having a procedure read to him, it's so that the reader (usually the more senior) can circle-x the steps and provide backup if he's about to jack it up. So an iPAD with check-boxes would be more appropriate, but then we go back to "just make a copy and put it on a clipboard and spend the $400 elsewhere."
And yet we still manage to screw up maintenance procedures while we have scaled back maintenance man training. My personal choice would be for Youtube style step by step maintenance videos, regardless of output format. Would you be onboard with that "innovation?"
Having done the Youtube video thing to do valve clearance on my bike, I would've killed to have had hands free to work.
And innovating processes without at least DH level approval is a big nono. The latter can be fixed with a culture shift, but now you have to convince the heavies to allow any Sailor to do alts to your expensive, proprietary goggles with the risk of damaging them.
I think the whole point of the CRIC is to not have to go through all the NAVAIR/NAVSEA crap. If I told you how hard our "heavies" have made it to approve putting a Goretex cover on a topside electronic component that has demonstrated operational suitability, your head might explode. The staffing requirements to get any substantial new effort off the ground are not trivial.
If you don't know the RoR and COSO, you shouldn't be standing watch.You don't pull out the rules of the road in the middle of the highway while driving your car, do you? VMS mirroring already exists, and VMS already displays CPA through the target data pair function (a relatively useless function that clutters the screen if PADs are on and set to a useful value, which they should be). Additionally, an iPAD is better for manuals as mentioned before -- presumably you'd be looking through a PDF of these documents and would need to get to the appropriate page quickly.
No argument there. But if I'm conning alongside and can view the radar picture simultaneously, I can cut the JOOD (whose sole purpose in life it is to stare at the radar and monitor radios) off the UNREP watchbill. I had the mental capacity to spare, but I couldn't be in two places at once. It's a big problem on ship bridges, SA tools aren't integrated and are placed all over without a whole lot of thought. I'm not Larry Page...so if it's an iPad instead, whatever, doesn't bother me. Given a choice, I'd rather have hands free to use binos, use radios, etc. though.
This is the crux of the issue. What problem are you trying to solve that can only be done with a tech that hasn't been released yet? It seems instead that you're trying to make the problems match the solution, cuz Google Glass is what the cool kids wear. And I'm sorry, but that's exactly what a lot of the top brass do with their pet projects -- we need this because I thought of it and it's different, not because it necessarily solves anything.
You need experimentation to happen some way. Maybe Google Glass isn't "the" solution, but at the very least, getting ahead of the "mobile/personal" computer wave is not a bad thing. I'm also happy that senior leadership is onboard with conducting experimentation to give us payoff later on down the road. I'm glad they're willing to see if there are ways to do things better than the way we've always done things.
I'm pretty sure if I looked hard enough I could dig up some posts from you complaining about this piece of gear or this process being broken. I'd rather we have some people trying to look at ways to make things better than crying about how much everything sucks.