Re: Future of Electronics In Aviation

"Le Chaud Lapin" <jaibuduvin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:083ff04d-201b-4be8-b6bd-612954a17a9a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Jun 19, 9:54 pm, Bob Noel <ihatessppa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> In article 
> <42217a97-d754-4162-b4fa-5a4b538ad...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
---------paragraph snipped----------
>
> What makes you think that software engineering, or system engineering,
> has progressed to the point that a software intensive system would be
> developed "with proper discipline"?

That's fair enough. Software, perhaps more than any other discpline,
allows engineers to place themselves where they are most comfortable
on the spectrum of intellectual discipline.

However, there are some engineers out there.  There is a young man in
Nederlands, for example, whose work I have had a glimpse of.  He has
Ph.D. in crystallography, but is breadth of knowledge is very wide.
His knowledge of mathematics and computer science is competitive with
that of Ph.D's in computer science and mathematics. His style of
engineering gives new meaning to the word "fastidious".

I would think 15 people like him should be sufficient to tackle any
software problem that might arise in the design of a PAV.  I also know
a few people who studied aero/astro at university.

In any case, while process is im****tant, the end result is most
im****tant.  And the end result would be seen by many people, before
the aircraft is flown, so most defects would be recognized.  I would
imagine that there would be people who would criticize the
architecture for free.

-Le Chaud Lapin-

There excellent counterexamples all around us--including the computers we 
are using to send these messages.

Peter