←back to thread

181 points Bogdanp | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
1. polishdude20 ◴[] No.45116769[source]
Funny how it's supposed to be designed to be legible. I read that as "disengage" at first rather than "disregard"
replies(2): >>45116857 #>>45116872 #
2. octo888 ◴[] No.45116857[source]
Not just me. Maybe it's how it's displayed on the web. I had an immediate "this is awful" response LOL
replies(1): >>45118078 #
3. Night_Thastus ◴[] No.45116872[source]
It may account for the specific displays used in the cockpit, the colors of the font and background, and maybe even interior lighting.

IOW it may be more optimal in its real usage.

4. fmajid ◴[] No.45118078[source]
The kerning is not great, for starters
replies(1): >>45118943 #
5. atoav ◴[] No.45118943{3}[source]
Legible != Readable

Legability means you have to be able to differenciate words and letters. With a font specialized for aerospace use that probably also mean it has to retain that quality when printed on panels.

A special requirement I would think of is legability while in motion. Try taking your favourite, perfectly kerned font and reading it while shaking your head wildly in poor light conditions, then you get a hint of why this font isn't optimized for looks.