3 ms·
This looks like a systemic error in the software development process. If an individual programmer caused it, it should have been caught in review. If it came fr
by hirundo 6y ago
This looks like a systemic error in the software development process. If an individual programmer caused it, it should have been caught in review. If it came from a requirement, that requirement was broken and it should have been caught in review.
Either way, a bug that results in an aircraft weighing 1,244 kg more than expected is indeed deadly serious. I write plenty of bugs, but luckily worst case is usually a web page failing to load rather than hundreds of people falling out of the sky. Our development process is clearly not adequate to this domain.
An adequate process for this would necessarily slow down development greatly and make it far more expensive. It's so much easier and cheaper to cut corners.
- tyingq 6y agoHaving spent some time in the industry, I can say there is a fair amount of scrutiny on the software that's used directly for weight and balance purposes. This situation, though, where input data to those systems is bad before it even gets there, is a loophole of sorts. Somewhat related, this makes me worry a bit about all the data privacy regulation that keeps you from testing (easily, at least) with real production data. Good testing from the W&B software might have unearthed the lower overall weights per aircraft.