3 ms·
Unlike you I have less than no background in this, most especially in aero, but if the faults were as basic as you've described, that would be not failure but o
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Unlike you I have less than no background in this, most especially in aero, but if the faults were as basic as you've described, that would be not failure but outright engineering negligence.
- WalterBright 3y agoIt's not engineering negligence. It's the process that is supposed to implement the design. That said, it's also a goal of engineering to make the process easier. One such technique is to design things in patterns. Then, if something doesn't fit the pattern, attention is easily drawn to it to investigate the problem. Design things so that when they look right, they are right. For example, look at the line of rivets holding an assembly together. They should form a nice neat pattern. I try to write software the same way. I lay out the code in patterns. Anything that looks out of place in the pattern draws attention as being a mistake.
- _a_a_a_ 3y ago> It's the process that is supposed to implement the design Not sure I understand, are you saying that this is a failure not of engineering but of processes? In that, the original engineering was sound but somebody took shortcuts in the implementation? Or do you mean something else?