Svarin
Svarin
"So many people posting here assume that the computers reacted "as expected", confusing it with "as programmed". I am deeply disturbed at seeing so many people who work in science and technology embrace blind religious faith into man-made technology. Where has the scientist's healthy doubt and critical judgement gone ?"
The answer is to pose 'silly' questions, and plant the seed. Engineers and Pilots both have to have the answer, and be first. It takes patience, but in an endeavour where Time is cheap, it is crucial.
First input, then, was in Normal Law?
just sayin'
RR
"Sounds like System Designers used the idea of Redundancy in an almost "wrong sense"..."
They were on the right track when they RFP'ed the software to isolated teams, encouraging anomalous, (but equitable), performance.
Think about it. Three Thales Probes. Let's eliminate two, and retain one. Gone is the need for constant "voting" and the very real possibility of fatally confusing the systems and pilots on the "Altar" of "guess we got that figured out".
With one Thales, one has binary reliability, if it packs up for any reason, we have BUSS. BUSS came after THREE THALES, so it was an acknowledged improvement in the name of critical safety.
Complex is not always the best. If one starts to incorporate some real analysis, the need for complexity disappears. Wait, doesn't that make _____ look bad?
boy howdy. So here comes Pride, Apathy, and Money.
I say NORMAL LAW or Manual flight. Making up stories is starting to get expensive, in machinery, and human souls.
Last edited by bearfoil; 12th Jun 2011 at 21:02.