4 ms·
I wonder to what extent cruft builds up in systems built on 'regulations written in blood'-style approaches to safety? There is always a loud proponent for anot
by gwern 3y ago
I wonder to what extent cruft builds up in systems built on 'regulations written in blood'-style approaches to safety? There is always a loud proponent for another safety procedure, more explicitness, more repetition, more features and doodads, but there is rarely a proponent for removing things, even though it cannot be the case that those additions were always right & never become wrong. If there were a reset to zero of the whole airplane ecosystem, how much would just never be recreated?
- actionfromafar 3y agoPossibly a new equilibrium, but it would probably be a similar set of rules also written in blood. The tricky thing about just another extra rule, is that usually it's not a big disadvantage. But at some point, there will be just too many rules which can slow things down and cause more failures. It would be interesting to see examples of procedures having been simplified for this reason.
- BWStearns 3y agoLook up NOTAMs. They've gotten so crufty that there are now apps to pare them down so you can actually see the relevant ones. The interesting thing though is that there are actually proponents for reducing NOTAM spam because aviation has recognized that alert fatigue is real. It's dangerous if you don't find out about the closed runway because your eyes glazed over after reading about the 30th 200 ft crane 8 miles from the airport.
- wkat4242 3y agoTrue, the cranes are a pest now. And they're well marked anyway. There should be a live mapping system that can just be updated on the fly IMO.