Re: OT: This system must have been written in Ruby...

Kenneth Tilton escribió:
Thomas A. Russ wrote:
Kenneth Tilton <kentilton@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

"At 1950 feet (around 700 meters) the airplane's left altimeter suddenly
and mistakenly registered an altitude of 8 feet (about 2 meters) below
sea level and passed the reading on to the automatic control system, Van
Vollenhoven said.
...

What system acts on an impossible data discontinuity, let alone one that
has the plane below sea-level? And then fails to fly the plane?

Well, when landing in the Netherlands, I imagine it might actually be
possible to be flying at 8 feet below sea level.

And a check with data about Schiphol airport confirms it. The runway at
the airport is at an elevation of -11 feet. So the reading was, in
fact, a legal and even expected data input value for a landing aircraft.

Nice research! But I was aware dry land existed below sea level so that
was not my big problem with the software.


http://www.world-airport-codes.com/netherlands/amsterdam-schiphol-225.html?page=5


Why is anyone but me allowed to program computers?!!!

Hmmm. I wonder what Kenny's flight control software would have done
when a plane came in for a landing at that airport? What would happen
when it encountered the "impossible" input?

Shudder.

Sorry, Charlie. My software would have known where it was (bless GPS)
and the geography (bless whatever) and the low-altitude warning would
have been silent anyway because it never would have seen the input.

Your imagined code needs a new layer, dude.

Ordinary good code would have identified the physically impossible
altitude change as, um, impossible, rejected it altogether, and fallen
back on extrapolation. The auto-pilot would have enjoyed a smooth flight.

Why do I have to explain such trivialities to a developer as astute as
yourself?

Trust me, we have not heard the end of this. I wager the software could
not possibly have been so bad and ... I'll stop there. They do say the
autopilot shut down the power...oh, my...

We need to get the altimeter a lawyer fast!

hth,kxo



What usually happens with this kind of things is not really a faulty
altimeter or software. No.
The usual thing is that there is somebody important flying who were
convenient to be died, and someone manipulated controls.
You new yorkers should know that.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: This system must have been written in Ruby...
    ... sea level and passed the reading on to the automatic control system, ... possible to be flying at 8 feet below sea level. ... Ordinary good code would have identified the physically impossible altitude change as, um, impossible, rejected it altogether, and fallen back on extrapolation. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: SEA LEVEL
    ... feet elevation over a period of approximately 30 minuted. ... Wasn't I sitting at sea level or closer to it than the ... the ellipsoid for NAD 27 could very well be 20 feet off ... Even the lowly consumer receivers of ten years ago had a model of the geoid in them to allow them to correct for the geoid / ellipsoid height difference. ...
    (sci.geo.satellite-nav)
  • Re: Victory for green lanes
    ... 40mph sign and a big yellow box and 30 feet of white markings in the ... you are in perfect control, ... Spoken like a person who knows nothing about me or my ability to ... white markings in the middle of your lane. ...
    (uk.rec.walking)
  • Re: I plead "Guilty"
    ... that is about 55 feet above sea level (or 188 feet depending on the ... source) I, on the other hand, am at 17 feet above sea level and about ... I am 500 or so Km from the Atlantic, but only about 60 metres above sea level, ... and some 30 metres above the Ottawa River. ...
    (sci.military.naval)
  • Re: gizmo
    ... but the name was changed to Mount Dora in 1883. ... and sits at 184 feet above sea level. ... where I live (a suburb of Orlando) I'm at 75 feet above sea level. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
Loading