Re: OT: A320 safe after land gear problem
- From: "Dave O'Neill" <daveon@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 1 Oct 2005 10:26:26 -0700
zoltan wrote:
> Microprocessors are unreliable for multiple reasons. One is the way the
> software is developed. High level languages, compilers, operating
> systems etc. distance the program developers from what really is going
> on.
That largely depends on what the system is and what it's being used
for. This is a sweeping and unreliable generalisation.
Another reason is the very small but finite chance of a bit error
> causing a jump to an invalid or incorrect address. Software tends to be
> like an incredibly long daisy chan with one instruction following the
> other. As soon as the chain is broken everything after that point in
> time is incorrect. I have developed methods to make microprocessors
> reliable. One such method is to apply a periodic reset which is
> followed by a short sequence of instructions. If something gets messed
> up, the next reset will start all computations from scratch. Another
> method is to use node and connection lists to drive the computations.
> In this way the connections are computations that deposit data into the
> nodes that are memory elements. Just like the brain. I made a four
> legged walking robot that learnt to walk with such a system.
Good for you, but I'm not entirely sure what point you are making here
with regard to the aerospace and embedded systems software industry.
> I prefer to write my own editor, development system etc.
?
Our customers prefer we use industry standard tools and work to
recognised industry standards and documentation standards.
You will find that to be the case in many industries. The civil
aviation industry, in particular, likes traceability.
> I actually like fly by wire, I just think it should be done right, so
> it is reliable. In my systems everything is done on a millisecond cycle.
The problem is doing things right on something as insanely complex as a
passenger aircraft flight control system is not going to be right on
the first go.
.
- References:
- Re: OT: A320 safe after land gear problem
- From: zoltan
- Re: OT: A320 safe after land gear problem
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: A320 safe after land gear problem
- Next by Date: Re: Could Falcon 9 compete with the Stick?
- Previous by thread: Re: OT: A320 safe after land gear problem
- Next by thread: Re: OT: A320 safe after land gear problem
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|