4 ms·
Given the low bars of success that seem to have been mentioned in this article, I'd wager there's still a lot wrong with the code. I'm not wholly sure '15 hour
by detritus 11y ago
Given the low bars of success that seem to have been mentioned in this article, I'd wager there's still a lot wrong with the code.
I'm not wholly sure '15 hours uptime' on a computer system is all that confidence-inducing, regardless of whether or not the plane can be reset after however few hours of flight-time it's able to muster.
- engi_nerd 11y ago15 hours of uptime is outstanding when it comes to the avionics that aren't actually keeping the aircraft in the sky. Most legacy fighter avionics required restarts every few hours.
- alphapapa 11y agoThat's very interesting. Do you have any examples?
- engi_nerd 11y agoNot from my own experience. Just going from the professional knowledge of friends of mine with years of mission systems engineering support.
- alphapapa 11y agoI'm just curious because I find it hard to believe that avionics in combat aircraft are or were so unreliable that they would have to be restarted every few hours. That would not work for e.g. bombers on long missions, fighters on CAP, etc. I can just imagine a pilot thinking, "Okay, we're about to cross the FLOT and I've got 20 minutes until the next avionics reboot. I'd better go ahead and reboot it now before we run into trouble..."