2 ms·

Not an automotive engineer, however, it's the same culture that produces the plethora of bugs in software. It's a human factors issue. It's no different than a

by fleitz 12y ago

Not an automotive engineer, however, it's the same culture that produces the plethora of bugs in software. It's a human factors issue. It's no different than an engineer selection of a single line of code, if it's in the wrong place, crashy crashy. Here's a much better article: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/us/article/Engineer-s-switch-from-hell-began-GM-recall-woes-5533018.php http://www.seattlepi.com/news/us/article/Engineer-s-switch-f... Perhaps the engineer was distracted by an underground boxing ring.

leoedin 12y ago
For reference, I work in the space industry, where piles of paperwork are produced to justify any component selection decision. I can't imagine a situation where anything, even down to individual capacitors, would be selected without at least 2 people having some input to that selection. Our qualification processes are absolutely massive and take decades though - not particularly suitable for the automotive industry. I don't think that this can be compared directly to the kind of adhoc software development that is routine in many places. Engineering processes have developed over decades to eliminate human error and very, very rarely allow single unjustified decisions made by a single person to propegate through to a finished product. I'm surprised that in a world where individual car platforms cost billions of dollars to develop there was never a point at which the switch selection was challenged. I haven't read the full report though - perhaps it's not quite as the news article suggests. It would be interesting to hear the point of view of someone in the automotive industry (if any of them are HN readers?)
- fleitz 12y ago
  Heh, I seem to remember something about O ring selection in the space industry, and how a senior engineer dismissed the claims of more jr engineers.

by fleitz 12y ago

leoedin 12y ago

For reference, I work in the space industry, where piles of paperwork are produced to justify any component selection decision. I can't imagine a situation where anything, even down to individual capacitors, would be selected without at least 2 people having some input to that selection. Our qualification processes are absolutely massive and take decades though - not particularly suitable for the automotive industry. I don't think that this can be compared directly to the kind of adhoc software development that is routine in many places. Engineering processes have developed over decades to eliminate human error and very, very rarely allow single unjustified decisions made by a single person to propegate through to a finished product. I'm surprised that in a world where individual car platforms cost billions of dollars to develop there was never a point at which the switch selection was challenged. I haven't read the full report though - perhaps it's not quite as the news article suggests. It would be interesting to hear the point of view of someone in the automotive industry (if any of them are HN readers?)

fleitz 12y ago
Heh, I seem to remember something about O ring selection in the space industry, and how a senior engineer dismissed the claims of more jr engineers.