4 ms·
I recall an early deep-dive into their safety architecture on the falcon 9, which was basically "throw 3 COTS processors at it and reboot anything that doesnt w
by superxpro12 7mo ago
I recall an early deep-dive into their safety architecture on the falcon 9, which was basically "throw 3 COTS processors at it and reboot anything that doesnt work, and fail fast during development". I remember they explicitly avoided rad-hard processors as well.
I would love to update myself if anyone has a good source.
For better or worse, it's hard to argue with results.
- whattheheckheck 7mo agoImagine trying to explain to 1960s tax payers were going to build and blow up multiple rockets for research velocity and dev feedback loops
- budman1 7mo agomaybe they are in a 'sweet spot'. spaceX is not on the bleeding edge of anything; rather they are optimizing existing solutions. incremental design changes, in a problem domain that has been studied for decades, and is well known, will provide results. "web dev" for an e-commerce platform will show great improvement with an agile, move fast development process. change the fundamental nature of the propulsion, or a step change in the technology, and it may be more effective to go with an engineered approach. 'engineered approach' --> before the item is built, a very good idea of how it is going to work has been determined. using math and science.