2 ms·
That's almost irrelevant. The point is, the computational power on even a 5th generation fighter is much less than a flagship smartphone. Which is fine, because
by engi_nerd 10y ago
That's almost irrelevant. The point is, the computational power on even a 5th generation fighter is much less than a flagship smartphone. Which is fine, because defense acquisition is on a completely different timescale than a typical consumer electronic product.
- nickpsecurity 10y agoI agree with your overall point but not smartphone part. The systems I'm seeing certified for DO178C, etc and defense are usually PowerPC boards with 1-2 cores. PPC always smashed ARM back in the day. So, some are probably better than most smartphones. Just not the highest-end. Which is fine because you're right: they don't need them. I'll add the older nodes were more reliable, too, as it was trivial to get chips to work vs deep sub-micron. I'll take old-school, fault-tolerant chip over modern ASIC any day if ny life is at stake.
- engi_nerd 10y agoMy point was that how much more or less powerful the avionics in a modern fighter are as compared to a modern smartphone is irrelevant. What matters is the ability to accomplish the mission in a robust and fault-tolerant matter.
- nickpsecurity 10y agoI recognized and agreed with that in my comment. Just correcting the misconception that they're all weak. Many are good and some have more than one.