Searching \ for '[OT] Technical support call' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/ios.htm?key=port
Search entire site for: 'Technical support call'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] Technical support call'
2007\04\10@121505 by David VanHorn

picon face
www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_stray_trons.html

Notice in particular that they were able to handle the problem in-flight?

:)

--
Jealousy is a disease, love is a healthy condition. The immature mind
often confuses one for the other, or assumes the greater the love, the
greater the jealousy. In fact they are almost incompatible; both at
once produce unbearable turmoil.
Jubal Harshaw, "Stranger in a Strange Land"

2007\04\10@132737 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
On 4/10/07, David VanHorn <spam_OUTdvanhornTakeThisOuTspammicrobrix.com> wrote:
> http://www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_stray_trons.html
>
> Notice in particular that they were able to handle the problem in-flight?

I can say from personal experience with the infrastructure equipment
that handles it, that Boeing has had "in-flight service" for the
airlines from their technical troubleshooters since at least the early
1990's.

(Remember I work in the teleconferencing field... the bigger the
problem, the more people tend to be listening in/assisting.)

"Hey Bob, call Boeing, I've never seen that light come on before, and
I was trying to enjoy my coffee, dang it."

:-)

Nate

2007\04\10@132833 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face
>
> www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_stray_trons.html
>
> Notice in particular that they were able to handle the
> problem in-flight?
>
> :)

Article says they "troubleshot" the problem, not that they "handled" the
problem. It was my understanding that all the fighters returned in less than
fully operational status. Do you know something we don't?

What I would like to know is this: Was there a conversation where one old
timer was saying "we MUST have a com and flight control system that does not
depend on the main computer" and all the young techs and management where
saying "why?" or "no we don't" or "that will cost too much" or "instead we
should have redundant computers" (loaded with the same buggy code).

---
James.




2007\04\10@133804 by William Couture

face picon face
On 4/10/07, James Newtons Massmind <.....jamesnewtonKILLspamspam@spam@massmind.org> wrote:

> > www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_stray_trons.html
> >
> > Notice in particular that they were able to handle the
> > problem in-flight?
> >
> > :)
>
> Article says they "troubleshot" the problem, not that they "handled" the
> problem. It was my understanding that all the fighters returned in less than
> fully operational status. Do you know something we don't?
>
> What I would like to know is this: Was there a conversation where one old
> timer was saying "we MUST have a com and flight control system that does not
> depend on the main computer" and all the young techs and management where
> saying "why?" or "no we don't" or "that will cost too much" or "instead we
> should have redundant computers" (loaded with the same buggy code).

Just as a datapoint:

  The Space Shuttle uses redundant computers.

  And part of the redundancy is that some of them run software
  that is written by a different company from the same specs.

Bill

--
Psst...  Hey, you... Buddy...  Want a kitten?  straycatblues.petfinder.org

2007\04\10@134243 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Tue, 2007-04-10 at 13:38 -0400, William Couture wrote:
> Just as a datapoint:
>
>    The Space Shuttle uses redundant computers.
>
>    And part of the redundancy is that some of them run software
>    that is written by a different company from the same specs.

Hehe, was just about to post something very similar.

I believe such a thing was common in the Apollo days as well, aside from
redundant different hardware, the software was also independently
developed to ensure one software bug wouldn't take out everything.

TTYL

2007\04\11@041953 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
Don't go that high, Airbus do the same from the navigation to the airplane
control system everything which is critical for flying the plane. As far as
I know even the hardware is designed by a 'shadow team'.

Tamas


On 4/10/07, Herbert Graf <mailinglist3spamKILLspamfarcite.net> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2007\04\11@183313 by Vitaliy

flavicon
face
Herbert Graf wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-04-10 at 13:38 -0400, William Couture wrote:
>> Just as a datapoint:
>>
>>    The Space Shuttle uses redundant computers.
>>
>>    And part of the redundancy is that some of them run software
>>    that is written by a different company from the same specs.
>
> Hehe, was just about to post something very similar.
>
> I believe such a thing was common in the Apollo days as well, aside from
> redundant different hardware, the software was also independently
> developed to ensure one software bug wouldn't take out everything.

I've heard somewhere that Boeing planes use three computers so designed
(three different sets of hardware and software). You need three because the
simple majority is needed to decide between a "1" or a "0".

-Vitaliy

2007\04\11@183542 by Nigel Duckworth

picon face
Interesting page on how they manage code for the Space Shuttle;

http://www.fastcompany.com/online/06/writestuff.html


Herbert Graf wrote:
{Quote hidden}

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2007 , 2008 only
- Today
- New search...