8 ms·
Hopefully I am not too naive, but I think aircraft safety redundancy remains above retail car standards. Also, in aircraft they "have time to solve some problem
by jmount 1y ago
Hopefully I am not too naive, but I think aircraft safety redundancy remains above retail car standards. Also, in aircraft they "have time to solve some problems", versus freeway bumper cars.
- 20after4 1y agoIndeed, but read the link I posted above if you're interested in a fascinating case of failed redundancy.
- sho_hn 1y agoEngaging version by the incredible Admiral Cloudberg: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/fields-of-fortune-the-crash-of-united-airlines-flight-232-9cf65ae14c68 https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/fields-of-fortune-the-cr...
- raverbashing 1y agoYeah Also people say "oh what if fly-by-wire fails" well what if traditional hydraulic controls fail, which has happened plenty in the history of commercial aviation Everything can and will fail at some point No redundancy is redundancy enough in some %0.xx of cases. You can always reduce the number, but never make it 0
- patrick451 1y agoThe reliability of software is so bad this is an absurd comparison.
- dtech 1y agoThis is a safety standards issue not a "software" issue. Standards for airplane software are very high Most planes have been fly-by-wire for decades and aren't regularly falling out of the sky
- 1718627440 1y agoSoftware is much easier to break accidentally than a valve.
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 1y agoI work for a medical device manufacturer, and software absolutely can be designed to be just as reliable as physical systems, but the development and testing process looks completely different than a developing a mobile app. Things slow WAY down: if you want to change one line of code, it'll take literally weeks before it makes it to a production environment because of all the testing, documentation, justification, and human approvals. I imagine flight safety systems are subject to a similar level of rigor.
- noAnswer 1y agoObligatory mention of SQLight going the DO-178B route. https://corecursive.com/066-sqlite-with-richard-hipp/#testing-and-aviation-standards https://corecursive.com/066-sqlite-with-richard-hipp/#testin... "Richard Hipp: Getting that last 5% is really, really hard and it took about a year for me to get there, but once we got to that point, we stopped getting bug reports from Android. "Richard Hipp: Yes, so we’ll do billions of tests."
- worik 1y ago> I imagine flight safety systems are subject to a similar level of rigor. Not for cars tho. Cars can be expected to be as reliable as the average windows PC unless there are regulations made and accountability assigned
- monocasa 1y agoI also don't believe they install OTA updates while in flight.
- sho_hn 1y agoAlthough if they did it would give a fantastic new meaning to "over the air" :-)
- monocasa 1y agoIn service to the pun, there is a relatively famous demo of using erlang for embedded development where they show off hot code reloading of a drone's flight software while it's in flight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQS9SECCp1I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQS9SECCp1I
- fn-mote 1y agoMore to the point, FAS regulations would absolutely forbid any such event. They probably mandate testing of the updates before returning to airplane to service. Completely unlike the safety standards for cars.
- NetMageSCW 1y agoWhich has nothing to do with a bad update being installed during routing maintenance and only failing in flight. Or while driving.
- reddit_clone 1y agoI am assuming/hoping that testing from Boeing/Airbus is far more stringent than that of Jeep !
- 20after4 1y agoBoeing doesn't exactly have the best reputation.
- mensetmanusman 1y agoNot for software. Hence airplanes needing reboots at certain time frequencies before they bug out in weird ways.