Pilot here. I will confirm this, and also add that there are many other ways to find an airport (paper maps, atc, handheld aviation gps, built-in gps, airport beacons at night, and also just looking out the window). In an emergency, the last thing I'd do is have my head down in an ipad/iphone. From the aerial shot it appears clear that it's not an airport, but it is probably the largest field around, so it would be a target in an engine failure scenario regardless.
Everyone is laughing now, but the Keyhole satellite imaging application is used by military planners. The consumer version is known as Google Earth, since Keyhole inc. was acquired by Google. The resolution and geo-references might not be as good as the Keyhole Military version, but it isn't "dangerously" bad either.
A pilot could quite reasonably use geographic way-points for a respectable approach and landing.
I'm not going to say that nobody would ever do it, but I will say that any pilot who relies on a smartphone's built-in mapping app to find airports deserves the outcome he gets.
There's a big difference between using consumer maps for rescue operations when no other charts are available, and flying in the UK where there are high-quality VFR and IFR paper charts (which all pilots are expected to have for any areas they're flying through, either for primary navigation or just in case the GPS dies), certified cockpit GPS data, as well as radar services available to help you find a suitable airport.
Somewhere, there's an intern with "While at Apple, developed state of the art automated feature identification algorithms for mapping team" on his resume.
> Somewhere, there's an intern with "While at Apple, developed state of the art automated feature identification algorithms for mapping team" on his resume.
I feel worse for the intern with ``Microsoft Windows Notepad'' on his resume.
This is all hilariously overblown and silly. And not about "feature identification algorithms". It's about one error on a map, which Apple probably has already fixed, and will soon if it has not yet.
There are a number of examples floating around that make it appear as if Apple is deriving map feature types from their names. For example, a water pumping station labelled as a gas station.
I can't speak to Ireland, but pilots using the Maps app for navigation wouldn't "fly" in the US. There are electronic cockpit apps that can be used on an iPad, but Maps isn't one of them.
I don't think that's what the Justice Minister means. It's conceivable that in an emergency, as a last resort, the pilot of a small plane may use the Maps app on an iPad or iPhone so scout potential landing areas. Obviously it's unlikely to happen but it is a possibility (probably not on a 747 though).
I would love to hear a sequence of events that could possibly involve a pilot attempting to land on the basis of information from an iPhone map.
There's whole emergency systems in place to ensure things like this don't happen- you know, basic radio contact with the ground being one obvious example.
Irish Government ministers should be dealing with our sovereign debt crisis rather than spouting crap about stuff they've no idea about.
Didn't see any reliance on a maps app for emergency navigation. In the one example the pilots printed out an image from Google Earth as a guide to the terrain of the landing area, they still used their eyes and brains to decide how to land once they got there. In the other they used the app to locate street addresses, but that wasn't critical navigation and the same could've been achieved with a standard street map.
I have yet to hear of any pilot relying on a maps app like Google Maps in an emergency.
If you can see the field, you can tell it's not an airport (although you'd know much sooner if you had your charts or cockpit GPS out), and decide if you want to land there anyway.
If you can't see the field, your iPhone GPS isn't going to be nearly precise enough to let you land safely anyway, even if it was an airport.
Problem: Autoland landed rough and to the left of runway
Solution: Autoland not installed on aircraft.
Apparently, when the 747 first came out they had issues with the avionics box for autoland, and someone didn't tape-off the panel in the cockpit as unserviceable.
Not sure where this is from, but I doubt it's true. Qantas has a fairly good safety record, and as far as I can tell (from Wikipedia and memory), only two incidents have occurred with 747s, and only one during landing: a 747-400 overran the runway in Thailand during a storm.
First of all: Qantas have had more "incidents" than that.
The Bangkok mishap was the first "accident" (substantial damage to the jet) since they started flying jet airliners.
A Qantas pilot explained the details of how it could have happened. If certain pre-landing checks were not done, and the module was missing, its Plausible for non-functioning autoland in a 747-200 to go unnoticed.
Accidently going off the side of the runway pavement could result in little damage, assuming the jet stayed controllable.
This was just a publicity measure for the guy's constituency.
No pilot flying in VFR conditions is going to need to rely on a consumer map application running on a smartphone or tablet in the event of an emergency, because they're trained to know their alternate airports and to look out at the ground to identify suitable emergency landing areas.
Similarly IFR pilots are required to file flight plans which often require explicit identification of alternate airports in the case of an emergency and they carry so much redundant equipment that a need to fall back on Apple Maps isn't a realistic scenario.
If you want to highlight the real dangers of people relying on maps with faulty data there are far better examples. For instance in the city in which I live Google Maps for years showed a high-end hotel as being in a really, really bad part of town. Unsuspecting tourists could get themselves into a bad spot just following what their maps app was telling them.
With people relying on the built-in maps apps on their phones to an ever-growing extent, Apple needs to put in a lot of effort to fix Apple Maps and they need to do it fast.
It sounds like you're a US pilot, are the regulations similar internationally?
Though I have heard of some pretty ridiculous landing decisions [1], I doubt this map error will increase Airfield's chances of someone landing there. So I totally agree, the situation described is rather preposterous.
I have experience with the regulations in South Africa, but they are similar internationally as a result of co-operation through the ICAO and other agencies. Most of the world also follows the lead of the US FAA and European JAA in terms of civil aviation regulations.
And yes, pilots have had to make some bizarre emergency landings over the years, but if you're in a situation where the engine quits and you have to get on the ground safely quick the last thing you'll be doing is looking down at your phone or tablet. So yep, preposterous.
"Clearly the designation is not only wrong but is dangerously misleading in that
it could result in a pilot, unfamiliar with the area, in an emergency situation
and without other available information, attempting a landing."
Maybe you shouldn't have named it "airfield", then?
I remember a story my mom tells about her, a Montanan until her adulthood, going to Chicago with her new husband (born and raised in Skokie) and asking him what kind of planes land in Wrigley Field.
I don't know how Apple could expect anything less than this response. They are coming from behind with the incumbent king of maps holding a lead they couldn't possibly hope to close in a first release. Possibly not in the first several releases.
It's a hard problem. Even if you get a good source of data you still have to present it correctly to the user and the best way to fix issues is to get it into the hands of users. If you allow competing maps on the platform though the users aren't likely to use yours unless the data is at least as good and the experience is superior.
I'm not sure this was a battle they should have picked.
53 comments
[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 149 ms ] threadThen I remembered a few similar occurrences:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianoce...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDgC4FMftpg
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Queensland-Floods-Helicopter-...
A pilot could quite reasonably use geographic way-points for a respectable approach and landing.
I feel worse for the intern with ``Microsoft Windows Notepad'' on his resume.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/59578
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/59578
The link you submitted is for:
Vim is far more useful, anyhow.
Notepad is 179kb of awesome. I have Android applications that do much less and take up megabytes of storage.
This is Apple. The resume will simply say 'worked at Apple Inc. developing software.'
This isn't a one-off. The mapping data is all over the place.
http://theamazingios6maps.tumblr.com/post/31933329952/the-ta...
What's that about one error being overblown?
There's whole emergency systems in place to ensure things like this don't happen- you know, basic radio contact with the ground being one obvious example.
Irish Government ministers should be dealing with our sovereign debt crisis rather than spouting crap about stuff they've no idea about.
I have yet to hear of any pilot relying on a maps app like Google Maps in an emergency.
If you can't see the field, your iPhone GPS isn't going to be nearly precise enough to let you land safely anyway, even if it was an airport.
Problem: Autoland landed rough and to the left of runway
Solution: Autoland not installed on aircraft.
Apparently, when the 747 first came out they had issues with the avionics box for autoland, and someone didn't tape-off the panel in the cockpit as unserviceable.
Sounds more like an urban legend to me.
A Qantas pilot explained the details of how it could have happened. If certain pre-landing checks were not done, and the module was missing, its Plausible for non-functioning autoland in a 747-200 to go unnoticed.
Accidently going off the side of the runway pavement could result in little damage, assuming the jet stayed controllable.
No pilot flying in VFR conditions is going to need to rely on a consumer map application running on a smartphone or tablet in the event of an emergency, because they're trained to know their alternate airports and to look out at the ground to identify suitable emergency landing areas.
Similarly IFR pilots are required to file flight plans which often require explicit identification of alternate airports in the case of an emergency and they carry so much redundant equipment that a need to fall back on Apple Maps isn't a realistic scenario.
If you want to highlight the real dangers of people relying on maps with faulty data there are far better examples. For instance in the city in which I live Google Maps for years showed a high-end hotel as being in a really, really bad part of town. Unsuspecting tourists could get themselves into a bad spot just following what their maps app was telling them.
With people relying on the built-in maps apps on their phones to an ever-growing extent, Apple needs to put in a lot of effort to fix Apple Maps and they need to do it fast.
Though I have heard of some pretty ridiculous landing decisions [1], I doubt this map error will increase Airfield's chances of someone landing there. So I totally agree, the situation described is rather preposterous.
[1] http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_northern_az/other/dps-p...
And yes, pilots have had to make some bizarre emergency landings over the years, but if you're in a situation where the engine quits and you have to get on the ground safely quick the last thing you'll be doing is looking down at your phone or tablet. So yep, preposterous.
It's been there since the 1820s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrigley_Field
See, in Montana 'field' is always (or nearly always) short for 'airfield'; there's no way to tell how language will change over time and place.
http://theamazingios6maps.tumblr.com/
It's a hard problem. Even if you get a good source of data you still have to present it correctly to the user and the best way to fix issues is to get it into the hands of users. If you allow competing maps on the platform though the users aren't likely to use yours unless the data is at least as good and the experience is superior.
I'm not sure this was a battle they should have picked.
[1] Our prime minister explaining what cloud computing is - "A wireless connection to shared storage" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzaQxLFl3rQ
[2] A senator explaining why the abundance of rain on the west coast of Ireland makes it particularly suitable as a base for, wait for it, _cloud_ technology - https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056460271