USAF feels Oleg's pain

[Azimech]

For many years I had the idea that aircraft development time increased primarily by the growing need for stable software. Seems I was right.
You see it everywhere in western industry if vehicles are concerned.

Can you believe carmakers wish to delete the physical connections between steer-wheels and pedal-brakes? I'm no luddite, but this goes too far. In a car you don't have the time to switch on a backup like in a plane.

Those enormous amounts of hardware & software aren't exactly in the spirit of Kelly Johnson. Instead of having a few aircraft that are the most complicated and expensive but clearly superior, why not a whole bunch of cheaper and simpler craft to maintain numerical superiority?

Not a single of those jets can fly in space yet the Space Shuttle's software is incredibly tiny in comparison. Instead of all those fancy computerized gizmo's why not develop a plane that can fly to twice the altitude of your competition so you can again dictate any rules of engagement? Think the X15 had a computer on board?

I like computers, that's not it. But I rebuilt my own 25 year old car and thank myself, I can repair it all by myself. The only computers that thing has operate the digital dash and the radio.

[lbuchele]

I recently read something in a Brazilian car magazine about software problems in the Ford Fusion V6 who was leading to the automatic gearbox disengaging suddenly going to neutral.
No big deal, unless you are in the middle of overtaking a car on the road.
Nothing mechanically wrong, just software problem,easily solved with reprogramming,but
it´s scary that this sort of thing can happens in a perfect normal car with no warning...

[WTE_Galway]

Lockheed martin this time huh, surprised it was not Northrop Grumman again. I notice they were in the news again a few weeks back for ripping off the DoD yet again:

The Virginian-Pilot
© September 9, 2010

A Pennsylvania subcontractor has been charged with defrauding the government by supplying critical metal components for submarines that did not meet Navy specifications.

The metal was intended for use in Virginia-class subs, which are built by Northrop Grumman's Newport News shipyard in partnership with Electric Boat of Groton, Conn.

According to papers filed Tuesday by federal prosecutors in Philadelphia, Bristol Alloys and its president, James R. Bullick, fraudulently certified that metals critical to the submarines' integrity had been heat-treated when they had not been.

The Fairless Hills, Pa., company is no longer in business, its attorney, Michael Diamondstein, said Wednesday.

Diamondstein said his client "has cooperated with the United States government in trying to help them locate any of the nonconforming pieces of steel. It's our understanding that at no point in time were members of the United States military in danger due to this."

Spokesmen for the Navy and the U.S. attorney's office in Philadelphia declined to say whether any of the disputed metal has been installed in submarines or whether there are safety implications for the subs and their crews.

A Northrop Grumman spokeswoman said the company is cooperating fully with the government but declined to comment further, citing the pending criminal case.

[bf-110]

Originally Posted by baronWastelan

I'm guessing that SoW is comparable to the F-35 software in complexity. The sim world is converging with real life aviation.

Nah..It has only a small difference.If something in SoW goes wrong,game crashes.If something goes wrong in a F-35,plane crashes too.

Other day I saw that computer viruses could infect car CPUs.I wonder if one can´t get its way trought a F-22 CPU?

[baronWastelan]

Here's how I see it: the cockpit of a new jet fighter or Airbus is actually a flight simulator, with a real airplane attached to it. So, any problem you might have with your PC could also happen to the CPU on the aircraft. Not very conforting to think about!

[AndyJWest]

Other day I saw that computer viruses could infect car CPUs.

Sounds unlikely. Where did you see this?

There are methods for reducing the harmfulness of software errors in safety-critical systems. One is to get code written by three different teams, and use 'majority voting' if there is a conflict when the system is operating. The flaw with this is it assumes that different programming teams won't make the same sort of errors - a doubtful assumption to rely on.

[dduff442]

From Mariner 1 via Ariane 5 to the SAAB Gripen prototype, the history of software in aviation is dismal. If a civil engineer built a bridge that collapsed, he'd be ruined. A software engineer builds his bridge again and again - hundreds of times - and when it finally stands up on its own there's a big party.

Thankfully physical modelling like Il-2/SoW has a better record than most, but many large software projects exhibit not just a lack of competence but a lack of understanding of the most basic precepts of engineering. It's not just that many big IT projects end up non-functional, they start out with designs that couldn't function in the first place. Computer Science grads need to be taught the difference between provable and non-provable designs and how to test ideas.

dduff

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by dduff442

From Mariner 1 via Ariane 5 to the SAAB Gripen prototype, the history of software in aviation is dismal. If a civil engineer built a bridge that collapsed, he'd be ruined. A software engineer builds his bridge again and again - hundreds of times - and when it finally stands up on its own there's a big party.

Thankfully physical modelling like Il-2/SoW has a better record than most, but many large software projects exhibit not just a lack of competence but a lack of understanding of the most basic precepts of engineering. It's not just that many big IT projects end up non-functional, they start out with designs that couldn't function in the first place. Computer Science grads need to be taught the difference between provable and non-provable designs and how to test ideas.

dduff

Unfortunately programmers as a profession are not subject to the industry self regulation and/or government certification that governs the conduct of architects, engineers, lawyers, doctors, surveyors, accountants and other professions.

The software industry is more akin to book or music publishing then any of the more traditional "professions" .

[baronWastelan]

Originally Posted by dduff442

From Mariner 1 via Ariane 5 to the SAAB Gripen prototype, the history of software in aviation is dismal. If a civil engineer built a bridge that collapsed, he'd be ruined. A software engineer builds his bridge again and again - hundreds of times - and when it finally stands up on its own there's a big party.

Thankfully physical modelling like Il-2/SoW has a better record than most, but many large software projects exhibit not just a lack of competence but a lack of understanding of the most basic precepts of engineering. It's not just that many big IT projects end up non-functional, they start out with designs that couldn't function in the first place. Computer Science grads need to be taught the difference between provable and non-provable designs and how to test ideas.

dduff

That's quite funny, but is it a fair comparison? People have been been building bridges for 1000's of years, and they all do practically the same thing. A single piece of software can do 100's of different things, many of them that have never been done before.

[Azimech]

Originally Posted by dduff442

From Mariner 1 via Ariane 5 to the SAAB Gripen prototype, the history of software in aviation is dismal.

I can give you an outstanding exception: the Voyager program.