Re: Would You Fly an Airplane with a Linux-Based Control System?

["Enrique Laso Leon" <enrique.laso-leon@tele2.fr>]

I am wondering why people try to make this accident an issue with the
programming language and not what it was : a total failure in a software
project management.

 The problem here was that the people who designed the IRS for Ariane 4 used
an asumption on its trajectory in order to avoid a check that would have
made the software tolerant to Ariane 5 trajectory (but why ?). This is at
best ignoring a basic rule of engineering : expect your design to be used in
a way you did not think about, because this is just what is going to happen.
It applies to machinery as it applies to software. How many of us use "bugs"
or "safety flaws"  in our favorite applications in order to get things done
?

 The other problem was with the baffling lack of testing. Once more it comes
from a management belief that experimentation is the root of all evil (takes
time thus money). Engineers there have a strong responsibility for the
existence of this belief. We tend to sell as a strong point that our design
and analysis methods are so perfect that we can produce zero fault out of
the box. This is simply forgeting that engineers, even supported by the most
efficient methods and computing tools, are human beings, that systems are
getting more complex than anything a human organisation can cope with, and
that error is not only probable, it is frequent...

 Tackle those two issues and you avoid blowing up a brand new rocket and 4
satelittes.
Regardless of the programming language.