3 ms·
Not in the industry, but I suspect it's not much different than Avionics for safety critical parts: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/3608/what-progr
by SkyPuncher 5y ago
Not in the industry, but I suspect it's not much different than Avionics for safety critical parts: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/3608/what-programming-languages-are-used-for-equipment-onboard-aircraft https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/3608/what-progr...
Basically, you work with low-level languages, be intentional about everything, and prove that the code you wrote works exactly as intended.
- redis_mlc 5y agoYour comment doesn't make a lot of sense, since "prove" is exceedingly rare. In fact, most airline systems have weird failure modes after 30 days, 60 days, 2^n rollover, etc. that require a reset. Airbus planes were famous for needing a reboot after taxiing, for a few years (those appear to be fixed now.) However, avionics devices are independent black boxes, and most non-trainer airplanes have redundant power buses, so usually there's power. (Trainers have a main bus and a relatively small automative-type battery.) There is a move in smaller planes in 2021 to allow glass-only cockpits with no steam-gauge electric backups like AIs to save money, which most pilots thinks is a huge mistake. (No AI at night or in hard IFR would be fatal.) The savings are about $2,000 at mfg. time, so you can see why people are side-eyeing this.