Alaska Airlines is officially the first domestic air carrier to replace flight manuals with Apple‘s ever-popular iPad tablet, a press release reveals. It’s not the wholesale changeover that the aviation industry has been inching toward, as the release also states that the airline is at this point still “exploring” the possibility of replacing paper charts with a tablet app. It’s a big first step regardless, though not an unexpected one.
Alaska Airlines, along with Delta Air Lines, have been testing in-flight tablet use to cut down on the paper consumption that results from the more traditional methods. That information came to light in March, shortly after the Federal Aviation Administration approved the iPad for in-cockpit use by pilots with Executive Jet Management, a charter airline service. Computerized chart replacements aren’t anything new in aviation, though the iPad is considerably lighter and more efficient in a number of ways that the cumbersome devices approved by the FAA almost a decade ago.
The March FAA approval only went to Executive Jet Management, but other airline companies stepped up at the time to reveal that testing was underway for similar approval requests. The charter service got an early start on the process in February, when it sought out and received support from the FAA to test the Jeppesen Mobile TC iPad app. Jeppesen is known for making “Jepp charts,” which pilots use for pre- and in-flight planning and navigation. The approval gave Executive Jet Management the right to use the iPad as the “sole reference for electronic charts, even during taxi, takeoff and landing.”
Aaah, not really true. AA has been using the electrnic flight bag option or "EFB" for several years, though like Alaska, not for nav charts.
American Airlines did release an iPad app in 2010, but the airline did not adopt the iPad as a piece of equipment in its cockpit.
This story was confirmed by Bloomberg, Alaska Airlines was first with this.
Gee. That's funny. I'm an AA pilot and I've been using an iPad in the cockpit for about a year and a half. But if Bloomberg confirmed I wasn't, I must be wrong. What do I know?
Likely not FAA approved though ;)
Wow. Really? You think we'd be using a non-approved flight manual device in the cockpit? I think I'm getting the picture here. Rest assured that whatever business you're in that allows you to think so lightly about your regulations and governing body, pilots take our jobs and the public trust very seriously and would not risk either by willfully disregarding FAA directives.
Here's what I know, first hand. Not what was reported, or what I heard someone else say:
The use of the iPad as an Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) was approved by the FAA due to the work done primarily by two AA pilots. I know them personally, by name, I know the committee they worked on, I endorsed the approval for the funds to buy the test device (an iPad) that they used in the certification. Without calling up these guys and asking the exact date (which this discussion doesn't warrant) I'll say the approval came somewhere around 18 months ago. It's my understanding that the authorization to use the iPad as an EFB applies to all airlines, not just AA. Individual airline flight departments make the determination about what equipment they're going to allow on their flight decks (and train their pilots in the use/limitations/procedures/policies of).
Prior to that, the FAA had authorized laptop computers that met certain requirements to be used as EFBs. This approval happened prior to NW188, and the subsequent discussion about banning computers in the cockpit was kind of funny as a result. AA authorized it's pilots to use computers as EFBs following the FAA authorization. As of today, those of us at AA in the EFB program can use either a suitable computer or iPad (suitability as determined in the authorization) to carry certain onboard publications. The benefit is a savings in weight and volume (I carry six required books on my iPad that would otherwise be in my kitbag) as well as time and cost (it takes less time and money to distribute a PDF, and less time to update a book by replacing it with a new electronic copy than posting a page-by-page change).
What is NOT approved yet (but AA is currently testing on the 777) is using the iPad for our navigational publications. The EFB I've been talking about currently consists of these documents: the operating and performance manuals for the aircraft, the company policy manual and the maintenance procedure books. The navigation publications (which we call Jepps, short for Jeppesen) are a more critical safety-of-flight document. These are the pages we use to fly the approaches to the various airports, and they have to be available 100% of the time, in bright sunlight, dark cockpits, with a backup power source, etc. Hence, the testing to use these devices in flight is underway on select AA 777 airplanes as we speak. We're hoping for approval by the end of the calendar year.
As for AA "apps", American Airlines has some marketing apps, and there are apps for employee travel, but there are no "apps" that AA created for flight department use. Jeppesen has an app they provide to use their navigational charts on an iPad (available to the public), and part of the test/approval process is determining whether that app is suitable in stock condition or whether it will need any modification/tweaking to provide the utility the line pilots need.
In closing, I've seen news stories reported over the years that I've had knowledge about. The facts were never correct, either because the research was shoddy, or the understanding of the subject matter was lacking. Sometimes the mistakes were minor, sometimes egregious. In the case of shoddy research — particularly as it applies to the Bloomberg story that started all this — the reporter could have called the FAA and asked a few questions and learned almost all of what I said above.
But in reading the story, it seems clear to me that someone at Alaska gave a Bloomberg some information for a story. In the comm business there's paid media (like ads and press releases) and earned media (when a media outlet takes the story on their own and writes about you). Getting your paid media to appear to be earned media (which is always much more believable and taken to heart without question than an ad or a press release, as evidenced in this case) is considered a homerun by the Corp Comm department.
So an up-and-coming Bloomberg reporter gets some info from Alaska that's essentially a self-promoting press release, thinks he's getting a scoop and repackages it as a Bloomberg news story, the airline gets their essentially self-written story into earned media, and the reader takes it all as gospel without questioning it because it came from Bloomberg so it must be true.
And this is something I know first hand too. I've done it. With the pressure on media companies these days, it's easier than ever. No one has the time or budget for old-style research. Hand someone a prepackaged story and they'll run it, especially if it's sexy, controversial or topical. Saves them a lot of work, and they get to put their name at the top.
Good on Alaska for that. Someone's gonna get a bonus check.
See. Flash isn't such a big deal.
Let's hope the crew isn't busy playing 'Angry Birds", emailing and downloading porn while in flight.