Airbus 380 To Have Linux In Every Seat

jpatokal writes "Singapore Airlines will be rolling out the A380 superjumbo on October 26th, and a surprise awaits in the seat of every passenger: their personal Linux PC, running Red Hat. In addition to running the in-flight entertainment, passengers can also use a full copy of StarOffice, and there's a USB slot for importing/exporting documents or plugging in your own keyboard/mouse. Screen size is 10.6" (1280x768) in economy, 15.4" in business and a whopping 23" in first class (along with free noise-canceling headphones). The system is already available on current B777-300ER planes and will also be outfitted on the upcoming B787 Dreamliners."

Delta/Song already uses Linux

[by Anonymous Coward]

It's not a full machine, but if you've flown Delta and used their in-flight entertainment machines (the trivia is great), they're using Redhat. I know this because I watched it crash and a subsequent reboot which was grub...

the kernel was a 2.4 version as I recall...

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[by Anonymous Coward]

I've flown Delta on a 757 and seen Linux reboot, too (I think we lost power while waiting for an open runway slot to take off from). But the system in the summary sounds much different; the Delta system didn't have StarOffice, it just had TV, movies, moving maps, etc. Basically read-only, except for paying for the in-flight movies.

Re:

[S.Gleissner (536865)]

No, it was not a crash, as i wrote here [slashdot.org].

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[shawn443 (882648)]

I see. They must have recompiled the kernel.

And here's a picture of the reboot..

[by Anonymous Coward]

Enjoy a few [flickr.com] pics [flickr.com] here [livejournal.com]. Incidentally "Song airlines" were the first ones Delta put these on. Song went out of business (there's a Frontline episode [pbs.org] you can watch about it) and the Song planes were turned back into Delta planes. Now all the Delta planes are scheduled to have the inflight video stuff too.

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[choas (102419)]

I just returned to the Netherlands this morning, flew from Las Vegas.

Delta indeed uses red-hat linux on their 'seat in front of you consoles'

Also loading some modules which taint the kernel (according to the message I saw)
I think it had to do with AAC.

Nothing against Linux on planes, BUT please, have someone on-board to service the
system or let it be serviced from the ground. As our flight from Las Vegas to New York
only showed red hat reboots continually during the flight, all the time. seemed like
Linux did boot with some ramdisk checksum errors, but it booted, but when the X layer
came on this triggered another reboot.

I'm a unix guy all the way, and they told me I could not have access to the plane's
media 'mainframe' or I would have had a look to see what was wrong. All I saw was that
the whole right side economy side of the plane was left with a rebooting red-hat distribution
showing a cute penguin in its left corner...

The whole time... 5 hours long...

This was NOT a good commercial. I wish it had been.

The whole system worked perfectly when I was flying to San Francisco two weeks ago!

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[jez9999 (618189)]

I'm a unix guy all the way, and they told me I could not have access to the plane's
media 'mainframe' or I would have had a look to see what was wrong.

Wow, they sound like idiots. What airline wouldn't want a random passenger given root access to their systems?

The Year of Linux on the Desktop

[jon_anderson_ca (705052)]

Yeah, right... when penguins fly!

Re:The Year of Linux on the Desktop

[by Anonymous Coward]

I have had it with these motherfucking penguins on this motherfucking plane!

Re:Delta/Song already uses Linux

[RAMMS+EIN (578166)]

You must be new here. You do _not_ talk about Linux crashing on Slashdot.

I always believed

[JRGhaddar (448765)]

Penguins CAN fly!

Re:

[by Anonymous Coward]

Penguins CAN fly!

You could get a whale to fly if you attached four 76,000-lbf Rolls Royce Trent 900 engines to it.

Re:I always believed

[JustOK (667959)]

Not if its on the watch list.

Re:I always believed

[Ultra64 (318705)]

you know how big of a bomb someone can fit in "their own keyboard and mouse"?

One the size of a keyboard and mouse?

FWIW

[The Living Fractal (162153)]

I don't know how they are setting up their installations but I would _highly_ recommend they use unattended installation images and re-image the installation EVERY day. Seems only logical to me. Neh?

Re:

[nukem996 (624036)]

In this case it would be best to use Thin clients. It would cut down the cost of having a powerful CPU and there would be no need for a hard disk. Power would also be conserved(which is important considering you are on battery on a plane). To top it all of no matter how much someone screws with their machine on a reboot everything is restored.

Dedicated turbine

[Harmonious Botch (921977)]

Not by the engines. Often it is a small dedicated turbine in the tailcone. That way you can have relatively quiet power while you are on the tarmac, and nobody gets sucked into the engines, and the relibility is higher because they are run at lower stresses ( ie: never at 100%, like the main engnes do at takeoff)

Re:

[tftp (111690)]

Usually each engine has a primary generator that is powering the airplane's circuits. This ensures that an engine failure (or shutdown) does not turn the entire airplane off, but only reduces the available power. An airplane needs an awful amount of electricity to fly; even your common strobe lights, mandatory in flight, consume kilowatts, and the landing lights are usually more powerful and must be on during the landing. But there is plenty of more important hardware on board, such as engine and flight con

Re:Dedicated turbine

[by Anonymous Coward]

You don't know what the hell you're talking about. Strobes don't consume kilowatts. Batteries must supply all flight instrumentation for at least 30 minutes for certification. Deicing is almost all bleed air powered. Engines need no system power to run, even with FADEC. The airplane will not fall like a rock with a total electrical failure. APU's will start just fine without any truck, at all. Gear is hydraulic, not electric. There are a few electrics controlling it, but they have mechanical overrides that allow the flight crew to drop the gear and flaps without electrics.

Re:Dedicated turbine

[DieByWire (744043)]

What provides the power to fuel pumps?

Engine driven AC generators. If the pumps are unpowered, the engines will gravity feed (except #2 on a DC-10... it's uphill), though they will probably not have enough fuel flow to make rated takeoff power. Not a problem in cruise.

How the pilot is to know what RPMs of remaining engines are (kinda important if you have one or more off,)

Essential instruments (and the lights to see them) are on a separate bus powered by the back up battery via an inverter for a minimum of 30 minutes. On some aircraft, indefinitely via a RAT (ram air turbine.)

and whether an engine is already on fire or not?

Fire detection is always on a battery powered bus.

Hydraulics is powered by electric pumps, not by power of will.

Unless your flying a 787 (no one has yet), your hydraulics on a Boeing or Airbus are powered by engine driven hydraulic pumps. There are usually some electric auxilary pumps for various events/circumstances, but not primary flight control.

Most of the battery's power will be spent on mechanically controlling the airplane.

100% wrong. Controls are hydraulic. (Electric/hydraulic on the 380, but no battery in flight could power that.)

Entertainment systems and galleys are the first things offloaded in the event of a generator failure. The biggest risk thes entertainment system pose is fire - ask SwissAir [wikipedia.org]

Don't forget the RAT

[daBass (56811)]

Don't forget the RAT, or Ram Air Turbine [wikipedia.org]. If all else fails, it will power enough systems to allow you to glide safely to the ground:

"A ram air turbine (RAT) is a small propeller and connected hydraulic pump, or electrical generator used as an emergency power source for aircraft. In case of the loss of both primary and auxiliary power sources the RAT will power vital systems (flight controls, linked hydraulics and also flight-critical instrumentation). Some RATs produce only hydraulic power, that is then used to power electrical generators."

Re:

[be-fan (61476)]

The thing you're describing is called an APU. It's used to start the jet engines, and to power the aircraft on the ground, but in most commercial aircraft, it does not provide in-flight power once the main engines are running.

As for scarcity, power isn't a terribly scare resource on an airplane. Remember, the engines are producing tens of MWs of power at cruise speed. Taking even a couple of hundred KWs off the main shaft to power electrical systems is not really a problem.

Re:FWIW

[tftp (111690)]

Of course it's possible, and that's how Linux-based embedded systems work. Your /home/$USERNAME can be created in RAM and deleted (recreated from a skeleton) after you log out (or the system restarted.) There is nothing else writeable on the whole box. This is necessary in embedded systems to prevent Flash wearing out, and to ensure reliability. Same needs here.

Re:

[tftp (111690)]

I use embedded Linux at work, and the hardware that we run it on has a jumper which allows to electrically prevent any and all writes into the Flash. If you want to upgrade the software, press a button inside. No software can compensate for a WP# pin on Flash being tied to the ground; you'd need to do the iPhone-style hack with a soldering iron, and I don't see this as likely during a flight :-)

Re:

[modecx (130548)]

Why not have a single server, and have the client heads netboot off of the server after every flight? That way, it makes it super simple to push updates, kills the chance of having people permanently mess with the systems, and everyone is happy.

This is not the first Airbus with Linux

[S.Gleissner (536865)]

Last year in february, i flew from Frankfurt, Germany to Johannesburg, South Africa with a brand new South African Airlines A340-400 Airbus. Just after boarding, the cabin crew resetted the In-Flight-Entertainment-System and several hundred screens in the seats showed a typical Linux booting screen with a small penguin in the upper left corner. They did not use a spash screen and it was possible to take a quick look at the booting messages... by the way, they made a network boot.

Security?

[eli pabst (948845)]

Hope they secure these well. With all the business travelers it would be a great place to drop a rootkit. From the article it sounds like each seat actually has a thin client, which would in effect reinstall the OS after each user/flight which is good from a security standpoint. But with access to a keyboard and USB hub, it still sounds a bit more vulnerable to abuse than a standard kiosk.

Reading is fundamental

[dreamchaser (49529)]

Which part of 'and there's a USB slot for importing/exporting documents or plugging in your own keyboard/mouse' didn't you get? I'd like to know that my documents won't be stored somewhere in some temp directory, personally. Security is a real issue for many business travellers.

Re:

[eli pabst (948845)]

You don't have a very good imagination then. Adding a keyboard and USB significantly increases the risk, look at the TJ Max breach, they got access using a USB port on a kiosk (shouldn't have been on a trusted network but that's another issue). While I think the thin-client idea significantly helps, you could easily load a recent exploit via the USB drive then sniff traffic or perform other nastiness like ARP poisoning/MITM and grab usernames/passwords/CC info of those on the flight.

Well, no wonder.

[twitter (104583)]

Airlines are not going to put an OS synonymous with "crash" in front of passengers. Everything, right down to the lighting has to work well to keep the appearance of order. Anything else makes the passengers nervous and looking for another airline.

Re:Well, no wonder.

[Kjella (173770)]

The 1990s called and would like their Win95/98/ME FUD back. Most people have an extremely short-term memory (see: elections) and in recent years with XP it's been mostly stable. It will go months between every time I have an involuntary shutdown (but sometimes it seems to build up cruft so a reboot is necessary - a scheduled one is still a lot different from a BSOD). Unless you're talking to someone that got a machine infected by viruses and shit, people actually won't curse like they once did. It works well enough that Windows crashes are actually on the noise level of power outages and application crashes, yes they're annoying but you're not buying an UPS for it, nor are you switching to Linux. And please don't compare Linux server uptimes with Windows desktop uptimes, Windows uptimes improve a lot on server class hardware too. In short, they're both stable enough for desktop use, so figure out what Linux does better instead of using antiquated and mostly irrelevant rethoric.

Re:Well, no wonder.

[dbIII (701233)]

Yes, but the above poster forgets that many of the linux advocates here are also responsible for quite a few Microsoft systems too and know from a lot of personal experience why you need backup domain controllers, rebooting machines at short intervals (eg. every week) due to memory leaks and the need to keep different services on different machines despite low resource usage - plus all the desktop hassles. They also forget that these long uptimes on other sytems are often on low end desktop hardware that has been retired from destop use and used as print servers or various other task - so the server class hardware argument does not carry.

There's too big a difference between stability over a eight hour period on a single user system that gets shut down nightly and other machines - hence the 2003 version and even 2000 version instead of XP.

Long uptimes have a suprising downside - I always forget how long it takes Solaris to boot and get nervous staring at a blank screen for a long time every time I start it - once every year (we don't need it over Christmas so it goes down for a week). An uptime of a year is no major accomplisment for any decent operating system. That is what people in the last decade or two mean by computer stability - and Microsoft software despite all it's advantages and improvements is just not playing in that game at all. They got to where they are by being cheap enough and just good enough. It gave us what is really the Microsoft PC instead of the IBM PC, which makes me grateful that I can effectively put a relatively inexpensive more powerful version of games machines into a rack to make up a processing cluster instead of something expensive from Sun or IBM.

StarOffice or Microsoft Office?

[Grond (15515)]

TFA [singaporeair.com] says that the systems run Microsoft Office, not StarOffice. Unfortunately, their video doesn't show any office software, so it's hard to tell. Maybe someone will hack up a version of portable OpenOffice capable of running on the systems.

Re:

[jours (663228)]

> TFA says that the systems run Microsoft Office, not StarOffice

Yeah, the two articles don't agree on that. But the system is based on the Panasonic eX2 [panasonic.aero] which is Linux by all accounts. And simple math (500+ seats times $299 per office license) tells you a single plane would have an IT cost roughly equivalent to that of a mid-sized company.

I think the smart money's on StarOffice here...

finally

[by Anonymous Coward]

nerds can join their own version of the mile high club!

Re:

[maxwell demon (590494)]

Well, it gives a completely new meaning to the term "uptime" ...

Gutenberg

[WindBourne (631190)]

If they are going to include terabytes of movies, they would do well to include gutenberg for those who like to read. Perhaps even offering a web server on board so that the book can be downloaded to the personal PC. Finally, they might want to approach one of the major e-book sellers and get them to port to Linux. This way they have nearly everything covered at a cheap price.

You haven't fully experienced mobility until...

[zaunuz (624853)]

...you've surfed pr0n at 20.000ft

How to crash at 27,000 feet

[WereRaven (461445)]

If I Wine do I get a Windows seat?

Do they know something we don't?

[raju1kabir (251972)]

I am a little worried that this is a result of Singapore Airlines management knowing something that the rest of us don't - namely, that it won't be long before laptops are banned from the passenger cabin for "security" reasons.

SQ is already the preferred airline for most business travelers who fly their routes. After this, they'll be able to lock up the rest, providing at least a usable means for productivity to business travelers who would otherwise have to sit on their hands the entire flight.

But can it run MAME...

[FauxReal (653820)]

...off a USB stick? Cause that would be awesome. And if I could bring my own mp3s and movies too... oh boy!

Not according to the article you link to

[fantomas (94850)]

Not according to the article you link to. That's talking about freighter version.

Re:In Singapore

[tgatliff (311583)]

This application is also ideal for Linux. Meaning, linux is best in computers or embedded devices where you need high reliability and you want to be able to specify the exact amount of the functionality it should have. Windows CE, at least in my opinion, does not stand a chance here..

In my opinion, the best part about this is Star Office. Eventhough in reality it probably is quite unlikely many people will use it, from the vendor's standpoint, it was nearly trivial to implement... That is the true power of OSS, which is over the longterm adding allot of functionality with limited cost.

Re:In Singapore

[rbanffy (584143)]

"linux is best in computers or embedded devices where you need high reliability and you want to be able to specify the exact amount of the functionality it should have."

While I would like to point out this is not about critical flight control systems (where I doubt any Linux would be certified as it costs a lot to be) and in-flight entertainment machines are OK to crash sometimes, the specific functionality is, probably, a win for Linux distros.

But, in the end, I suspect the real deal here is about price. The cheapest solution won. It would be hideously expensive to have Windows Vista PCs with Office 2007 on every seat of a jetliner.

Re:In Singapore

[burnin1965 (535071)]

While I would like to point out this is not about critical flight control systems (where I doubt any Linux would be certified as it costs a lot to be) and in-flight entertainment machines are OK to crash sometimes, the specific functionality is, probably, a win for Linux distros.

Doubt no more...

RTLinuxPro is shipping in the just released Gen4 EFIS/One glass cockpit from Blue Mountain Avionics. [technologynewsdaily.com]
"Airspeed, Altitude and VSI, magnetically slaved all-attitude compass, HSI, solid state AHRS (Attitude Heading Reference System), a 12 channel GPS navigation engine and the highest resolution 3D terrain available. There's also a built in digital autopilot with altitude hold and ILS capture, a full air data computer with fuel burn and fuel totalizing functions, a flight planning system and digital monitoring of up to 32 engine gauges. The built in flight recorder and the new flight performance software, monitors flights, engine performance and much more."

Now obviously this is not your average linux distro, but then there are many reasons one could expect to find linux used in a flight control system, one of those reasons is the robust nature of linux and its reputation for not crashing. That's not to say that linux never crashes, but in my experience crashes involve running questionable code, i.e. closed source graphics drivers and the games that require those drivers.

Re:In Singapore

[burnin1965 (535071)]

they felt the need to virtualize that Linux-based OS under an RTOS.

More specifically, RTCore provides the Hard Real Time interrupt and thread handling as RTlinux alone is only Soft Real Time capable. But make no mistake, RTlinux is not used as an in flight entertainment system in the EFIS/One.

The following paper has a good description of what RTCore is and does for RTlinux.

http://vir.liu.se/~TDDB72/rtproj/reports2006/04-v2 -oskhe171steho564-RTLinux_VxWorks_scheduling.pdf [vir.liu.se]

Re:In Singapore

[jaweekes (938376)]

I really wonder if they are using Virtual machines. The ease that they can be erased and start from scratch would be handy in that type of environment, and it wouldn't matter what you did to it. It would also help in isolating the network, so you couldn't mess up all the other computers.

Re:In Singapore

[tgatliff (311583)]

The problem would be the video. Meaning, if you go with a thin client approach, it would be very difficult to get enough bandwidth across many devices to get at least the 15fps required... I suspect it is a blend of the two. Meaning, they have less powered computers (probably flash based) that drive the end user, and then a main file server the distributes the video data.

Re:In Singapore

[SL Baur (19540)]

Singapore Airlines is one of the best airlines in the world (I'd rank only ANA ahead of them). The last time I rode them across the Pacific I was amazed at the service their stewardesses gave. I was seated second row from a bulkhead and behind infant row and was amazed at all the attention the parents got to help their crying babies. They gave them more personal attention in an hour than an entire US carrier plane gets an entire flight.

They already offered a computer equivalent entertainment system (in coach!), but this sounds even better.

I hate most carriers and I hate flying with all the security and no-smoking crap, but in a bad environment, Singapore Airlines and their sister Silk Air do quite a nice job and Changi Airport is *sweet* as International airports go.

The Singapore government may have issues with some, but all my experiences with Singapore have been positive. Reading this makes my day.

Re:

[Ajehals (947354)]

It wouldn't count as distribution any more than making Linux available to your employees would be distribution. The aircraft and the on board systems belong to the airline, the airline is making them available to customers, if they would let you take the machine home then it would be distribution. Even if you were using windows and the associated MS back office kit, you would only need to have licenses for each seat, not each new user, and you certainly wouldn't need to have a license that covers distribu