3 ms·
Given for how long we have been developing airplanes and even planes in almost the same size as the A350 the lack of a somewhat standardized development process
by pmr_ 13y ago
Given for how long we have been developing airplanes and even planes in almost the same size as the A350 the lack of a somewhat standardized development process astounds me. Did newly developed planes used to be less safe and were more problems worked out during actual use? Or did they just not have as many problems to begin with due to less automation and sturdier but heavier materials?
- Serow225 13y agoHaving worked in the flight test industry in a 'prior work life', nothing that this article describes sounds especially interesting or novel. I think what happened is that when the planes started getting technologically intense and at the same time the development team became highly distributed (geographically and contracted), there was a period of time where things 'got out of control' in that a) the design/simulation tools didn't have good capabilities for dealing with this level of distributed/revisioned work b) it was more important to 'get the job done' than making sure that everyone used the same exact toolchain and was working on the same version of the model etc. Eventually this caught up with them and they experienced some significant issues (like the wiring snafu the article mentioned, and I also recall another issue where fuselage parts wouldn't mate up), which finally made the industry pull back and get serious about fixing these design tool/practice issues.
- branchan 13y agoThe release cycles for aerospace companies are a lot longer than in software. The previous A330 that they are talking about was originally released back in the early 90's. I assume Airbus didn't think it needed a full development system overall for incremental upgrades but believed it did when it came to designing a whole brand new airplane.