4 ms·
Most of us are working on things that are several orders of magnitude less likely to get someone killed than the F-35 radar code. The goal for safety-critical e
by solipsism 11y ago
Most of us are working on things that are several orders of magnitude less likely to get someone killed than the F-35 radar code. The goal for safety-critical embedded flight code is 0 hard reboots mid-flight. Is that controversial, in your opinion?
Edit: "standard for safety-critical embedded flight" was a bad word choice and wasn't what I meant. s/standard/goal
- icegreentea 11y agoThey found a bug in testing and are fixing it. That's literally why you test critical code, in case you didn't get it right.
- solipsism 11y agoI realize this. But bugs are sometimes worth talking about. Many people feel that a bug requiring a hard reboot mid-flight in a 5th generation fighter, a problem apparently not able to be overcome through multiple generations of fighters, is worth talking about. If you, or the original complainer, disagree, you're free to not participate in the conversation, but complaining about the rest of us talking about this bug is annoying. Quoting from Boeing: The F-35 has the most robust communications suite of any fighter aircraft built, to date. Components include the AESA radar, EOTS targeting system, Distributed Aperture System (DAS), Helmet Mounted Display (HMD), and the Communications, Navigation and Identification (CNI) Avionics. If by robust they mean "you can go 8 hours instead of 4 hours between hard reboots", I think that's worth talking about.
- mynameisvlad 11y agoAs per hackuser's comment above, the mean time between reboots on most mature fighters is 8 hours, while the F-35 is 4 hours, so the standard is clearly not 0 hard reboots.