4 ms·
We're talking about the same manufacturer that's responsible for the 737 MAX fiasco. I'm not sure how much trust I would want to place in their software.
by kijin 8y ago
We're talking about the same manufacturer that's responsible for the 737 MAX fiasco. I'm not sure how much trust I would want to place in their software.
- icebraining 8y agoYou're putting trust in their software whether you upgrade it or not.
- sslayer 8y agoYou forget that Boeing doesn't own these planes. These aren't Tesla's. We are currently in an era were it seems to be expected that the manufacturer automatically update their software without the end user intervention, ie Tesla, Windows, Apple, etc... Thats not how it was done in the past, particularly when the bandwidth didn't exist.
- icebraining 8y agoI don't see how this changes what I wrote.
- throw0101a 8y agoNot necessarily. Different components could be made different companies. While flight controls and handling fly-by-wire could have been Boeing, the FMS could be (e.g.) Honeywell, GE. The FMS, AFCS ("autopilot"), and (primary) FCS are three distinct systems per ATA iSpec 2200: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATA_Spec_100/iSpec_2200 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATA_Spec_100/iSpec_2200 Things can be more blurred with fly-by-wire, but can still be conceptually separate.