From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,7c1ca6be7961c074
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!h18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: MRE <Marc.Enzmann@web.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: OT?: AF 447 and avionics software
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 00:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <2fb5ee80-6a89-4df1-b4a7-e0922f179f68@h18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
References: <78pifuF1k9uvuU1@mid.individual.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.25.39.47
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1244186544 23273 127.0.0.1 (5 Jun 2009 07:22:24
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:22:24 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: h18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com; posting-host=193.25.39.47;
	posting-account=9oKlagoAAAArpDKc-z70x-nwdNs7Rw_P
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.9.0.10)
	Gecko/2009042316 Firefox/3.0.10 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6287
Date: 2009-06-05T00:22:24-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 4 Jun., 11:29, "Alex R. Mosteo" <alejan...@mosteo.com> wrote:

> I think Airbus is mainly Ada, right? Do you know some good place to read
> about its software systems?
No, not really. In my experience Airbus does not mandate the use of a
programming
language. Thus the language used depends on the supplier. You will
find a lot
of C in the boxes. In a number of critical systems Airbus prefer to
use
SCADE, which can generate C, Ada and afaik SPARK.

> "In these fly-by-wire systems, one never really knows if one has checked out
> all possible combinations of events to make sure that the computer properly
> reacts,"

Sorry in advance for the language: This quotation is pretty fucking
brilliant.
The rocket scientist that came to this brilliant conclusion seems to
be a real
expert in the field of complexity theory.
Thing is: even if you use analog electronics 50's style you can not be
sure
that you have checked all possible combinations of events. So what's
the
proposed conclusion? Let the pilots fly manually? Will those pencil
pilots
in the media ever learn that their "investigative journalism" is just
a form
of stirring bullshit?
Sorry, I'll stop letting off steam right this instant.

>What about these ADIRU units, are they delivered to Airbus by some provider
>or are of their own built?
Most of the systems in a modern passenger aircraft are being built by
companies that specialize in certain fields. Airbus, Boeing,
Embraer,...
just specify what the need and then buy the things and put them
together.

Best regards,

Marc