Sorry for the delay in responding only been keeping half an eye on this thread as its been a bit of a shambles at the start.
rainboe:
I think software developers reading this thread, and people who have suddenly decided they could make software developers, should understand that far, far better software developers than you thought long and hard, and worked on this system design, and developed it in the light of experience, and have produced a system that has worked fine for all the world for 25 years.........except for 1 flight.
There is alot of truth in what rainboe has said here. As a programmer with 19 years experience across many industries I would expect you to shoot me down in flames if I told you how to fly and recover a plane as much as I would if you told me how best to write a bit of code. But thats besides the point.
Computers do make wrong decisions, but not often, it is the humans interpretation of the problem the computer is working to - if the parameters encountered are outside of those allowed for or expected then the computer will do the best it can given the information provided. People adapt alot easier than computers do to real time situations and can pull on experience - computers only follow a linear set of instructions. (For those interested in artificial intelligence pls start a seperate thread in jet blast to discuss as the result is the same).
My interpretation of what has been said so far is that the autopilot should have saved the day or at not least screwed up - computers dont think - they do - which is why we have the term GIGO (Garbage in Garbage out). Many a time a computer will function correctly but if the peripherals feeding it are feeding it garbage - a computer cannot make an educated guess based upon accumalted knowledge and experience - it can only do what it was instructed to do.
I personally have declined contracts in aviation, military and medical areas purely for this reason. I dont want it on my conscience to be blamed for an incident whereby the computer was relied upon where as it should have been used as a tool. Perhaps we can read this in me not being confident in what I do - or as I see it I am confident in what I write and test but not in how its implemented and sold (relied upon).
It is very important that you guys realise that all automatic aids such as the autpilot, gps, etc etc are just that in being aids. Hindsight is the only way parameters are going to be added to the software at which point test pilots are required to gain that hindsight and as sad as it is this incident could be an example of an unwilling test pilot adding to the knowledge pool. Yes it may sound to you like I am telling you how to do your job in some respects but hindsight to me tells me to enforce on to you as pilots to not rely upon systems as gospel as they rely on what was the understanding at best the last time the software was updated.
I would underline in any project we undertake, we can only simulate and facilitate your work load - but we are a long way from replacing you.
I do hope I have added value to at least some's understanding
regards
Jof
p.s. We must remember the computer is bound by the laws of physics also