Re: Sweden Fighter Crash

[att-out!cbnewsl!willett@rutgers.edu (david.c.willett)]

>From article <25auuq$832@gopher.cs.uofs.edu>, by bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bi
ll Gunshannon):
> In article <1993Aug23.091155.7738@celsiustech.se>, bjkae@celsiustech.se (Bjor
n Kallberg) writes:
> |> >This just came in on the apnews
> |> >
> |> >	   STOCKHOLM, Sweden (AP) _ Sweden's new jet fighter crashed during
> |> >an air show last week because of a computer flaw, an inquiry board
> |> >said Wednesday in clearing the pilot of blame.
> |> >	   Producers and military officials had been aware that vigorous
> |> >movement of the control stick could cause the JAS 39 Gripen to go
> |> >out of control because of computer overcompensation. But they
> |>                            =========================
> |> 
> |> Do you call this a programming bug? 
> |> 
> 
> Unless the computer "overcompensated" of it's own volition, yes, I call 
> that a programming bug!!
> 
> The only thing left is to get a definitive answer as to wether or not the 
> applicable code is written in ADA.
> 
> Of course, in either case (this one or the AT&T one) neither is an indictment
> of the language.  Only an example that programmers make mistakes and no
> language can prevent all of them.
> 
> bill
> 
> -- 
> Bill Gunshannon          | "There are no evil thoughts, Mr. Rearden" Francisc
o
> bill@cs.uofs.edu         |  said softly, "except one; the refusal to think."
> University of Scranton   |
> Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   

Why do you call it a programming bug?  Perhaps it was a "system error" in that
the feedback loop to the control surfaces wasn't tight enough?  Sheesh...
I've seen less "Monday morning quarterbacking" in campus sports bars.

Two points --

	The report cited above is from AP, hardly a technical source.  Blame
the crash on a "computer problem" and the public breathes a sigh of relief.
We don't know what the root cause is, and can't until the final report of the
investigating team is in.

	Probably the computer and fly-by-wire software was involved.  It's a
fighter, folks.  The plane is probably inherently unstable.  Just because 
the software was part of the loop, doesn't make it defective.  Perhaps the 
pilot overstressed the system.  Again, we don't know.  Let's not indict 
something without evidence.


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Dave Willett          AT&T Federal Systems Advanced Technologies

The biggest mistake you can make is to believe that you work for someone else.
			
			-- Anonymous