Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Coming Boeing Bailout?

mattstoller.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 189 posts

Re: The Coming Boeing Bailout?

#91

Post by _ph_ »

bdavis__ wrote: post #67
mannykannot wrote: post #64

This article repeats the claim that the MCAS software was faulty, but is there any evidence of coding-level errors? There is the systems engineering failure of not comparing the two available AofA sensors to detect faults, if not going for at least triple-redundancy, but the root cause there is not a coding error. It has been suggested that high AofA readings should have been rejected unconditionally, but that approa…

kind of depends on how you name it. my understanding is the code 'worked per requirements', meaning it did everything that it was supposed to, as defined by the requirements allocated to it. for things like this, there is a layer of 'systems engineering', that decides (hopefully using an engineering process) how the airplane will work. this is codified into a 'specification', that is then handed over to software to i…

The MCAS is a good example, why certain software must not be outsourced. Implementing the software correctly to spec isn't enough, you need enough understanding of the application to question the spec itself.

Re: The Coming Boeing Bailout?

#92

Post by AnimalMuppet »

bradleyjg wrote: post #29
nabla9 wrote: post #16

Governments should have predatory practice towards shareholders in these cases. If company can't be allowed to fail (strategically important or government regulated sector like banking) there should be 'fluid bankruptcy' option. When they default or fail their obligations, the next day the government owns them without operations being disrupted. Shareholders lose everything overnight and any private debt would have s…

There is a third group of people whose incentives towards risk need to be taken into account -- employees. When the government takes over the employees should be moved to the GS or SES schedules.

That might guarantee that the company remains a money-loser, dependent on the government forever.

Re: The Coming Boeing Bailout?

#94

Post by CydeWeys »

bradleyjg wrote: post #77
CydeWeys wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No assumptions necessary; being able to manufacture cutting-edge aircraft is clearly strategically important to a country's national defense.

Oh? Which country would be able to successfully invade the US if we didn’t have cutting edge aircraft?

Air supremacy is of paramount importance in modern warfare. Look at how thoroughly we were able to dominate the conventional land battles in Iraq and Afghanistan because of it. You can't have an effective national defense (or offense) these days without a good air force. And we're fortunate that ours is home-grown, not bought. Just go ask Iran what it's like having a non-home-grown air force; they have a bunch of F-14s they can't even fly because the necessary replacement parts have been sanctioned for a long time.

Re: The Coming Boeing Bailout?

#95

Post by tempguy9999 »

seren wrote: post #74

What is more worrying for Boeing is that a SW fix might not be that easy to implement. According to that article [0], the fix is running too slowly on the Flight Control Computers, that are based on a 80286 architecture. I am not sure how reliable this info is, and that should not be surprising given the cost of verification or certification of an aircraft, but I am still surprised that a 2019 plane, has still some H…

Possibly talking rubbish but: a 286 is simple, well understood both in terms of its spec and its performance (no fancy pipelines, no cache, so very predictable performance), is fabbed probably in the order of a micrometer so highly resistant to cosmic rays (assuming CRs do affect circuitry), inerface to memory that is equally 'boring', those 286s are perhaps hardened and quite possibly still produced for this purpose.

All the above is speculation but I can imagine that I'd like very old, boring, predictable and very understood tech rather than the latest. That said, it is a bit unexpected.

Re: The Coming Boeing Bailout?

#96

Post by bdavis__ »

_ph_ wrote: post #91
bdavis__ wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

kind of depends on how you name it. my understanding is the code 'worked per requirements', meaning it did everything that it was supposed to, as defined by the requirements allocated to it. for things like this, there is a layer of 'systems engineering', that decides (hopefully using an engineering process) how the airplane will work. this is codified into a 'specification', that is then handed over to software to i…

The MCAS is a good example, why certain software must not be outsourced. Implementing the software correctly to spec isn't enough, you need enough understanding of the application to question the spec itself.

anything that is connected to the flight controls, is too important to sub out (unless you are subbing it out to someone better that you are).

making an airplane is a huge endeavor that crosses across many domains. you have to have competency up and down the 'stack'. Boeing does.

Maybe this will cause a re-look at outsourcing policies.

(edit. yes, this software was not outsourced. but it may add another dimension other than cost for future decisions)

Re: The Coming Boeing Bailout?

#97

Post by kova12 »

seren wrote: post #74

What is more worrying for Boeing is that a SW fix might not be that easy to implement. According to that article [0], the fix is running too slowly on the Flight Control Computers, that are based on a 80286 architecture. I am not sure how reliable this info is, and that should not be surprising given the cost of verification or certification of an aircraft, but I am still surprised that a 2019 plane, has still some H…

Perhaps they should replace it with raspberry pi or something...

Re: The Coming Boeing Bailout?

#98

Post by partha42 »

_ph_ wrote: post #91
bdavis__ wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

kind of depends on how you name it. my understanding is the code 'worked per requirements', meaning it did everything that it was supposed to, as defined by the requirements allocated to it. for things like this, there is a layer of 'systems engineering', that decides (hopefully using an engineering process) how the airplane will work. this is codified into a 'specification', that is then handed over to software to i…

The MCAS is a good example, why certain software must not be outsourced. Implementing the software correctly to spec isn't enough, you need enough understanding of the application to question the spec itself.

Software engineers are not aerospace engineers. I doubt the software people would have understood the aerodynamic effects of the MCAS system by looking at the requirements.

Re: The Coming Boeing Bailout?

#99

Post by mrj »

canada_dry wrote: post #80

> military procurement and engineering created a corrupt design process, with unnecessary complexity, poor safety standards Assuming this permeates a considerable amount of the US military spending I'm curious how much it deflates the true value? The US spends more than double China on military, and although it is likely a portion of their (China) budget goes towards graft and corruption my suspicion is that actual d…

The US spends a _lot_ of that on graft and corruption, as well. Even the article linked here mentioned playing politics with procurement, but also consider the billions and billions paid for military hardware that doesn't work and the Pentagon has gone on record saying they don't even want. The US has grown comfortable thinking it's still ahead while they continue to prepare for a style of war that will not come. If history is any guide, the next big war will be fought with a technology that takes advantage of the weaknesses of the previous leader, despite spending advantages.

Re: The Coming Boeing Bailout?

#100

Post by platz »

wsxcde wrote: post #90
mannykannot wrote: post #64

This article repeats the claim that the MCAS software was faulty, but is there any evidence of coding-level errors? There is the systems engineering failure of not comparing the two available AofA sensors to detect faults, if not going for at least triple-redundancy, but the root cause there is not a coding error. It has been suggested that high AofA readings should have been rejected unconditionally, but that approa…

> This article repeats the claim that the MCAS software was faulty, but is there any evidence of coding-level errors? No, there isn't. The Verge (and IIRC other sources) have reported that the crashes were due to failures in the angle of attack (AoA) sensors. No program in the world is going to give you correct output with garbage input. Verge link: https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/2/18518176/boeing-737-max-cr...

The software did way more dumb things than it needed to in the presence of these failure modes.
Post reply on HN