|
|
My impression when I hear 'glass cockpit' is all flight & nav instruments so our disagreement may be in my misinterpretation of your meaning . I just took another look at your web site to see what you meant by 'glass cockpit'. I can understand using windows for data logging & engine monitoring. But, even if Windows wouldn't kill me by locking up during a VFR flight, I wouldn't want to tie all my flight instruments & nav duties to it just because of the hassle factor when I get the blue screen.
Maybe we aren't that far apart in our attitudes about risk vs benefit. I *do* have an iPaq running moving map in the cockpit, but it is non-essential & only a minor irritation when it locks up, since I have a dedicated GPS/moving map independent of the iPaq.
Charlie
al p Wick wrote:
Needless to say, you are welcome to use whatever criteria you want to
make a decision. I try real hard to convert these decisions to logical
statements. So I would interpret your statement as "Charlie thinks the
risk of computer shut down is greater than the risk of crashing from one
of the things it monitors."
The computer is running only a couple of applications. It's not on the
internet. So if I fired up any win platform running one application, how
often would it crash? If it operated for two weeks without crashing, that
is equivalent to my flying for two years. Seeing as the average pilot
flies less than 150 hours a year. Realistically, if Iwas running win 3.1
(remember that old sys?) EVEN it would go for over 10 years without a
blue screen.
So it's very low risk....but there is more.
The blue screen risk is independent probability. So it's only when it
crashes at the same time as one of the items we monitor goes belly up,
that we are in trouble. Remember, the laptop doesn't fly the plane. It
just monitors things, tells you if something is awry. So the odds of
those two happening at the same time? Holy cow, it must be astronomical.
1 in x billion or so. Using this logic, it's abundantly clear that the
windows system is entirely suitable. However, that would change if I were
using to laptop to perform some flight critical function. Suddenly they
are not independent probabilities, but dependant ones. But we aren't
using it in that manner.
I managed quality assurance for a living. So I put solutions in place,
then measured how well the solution worked. I then tried another
solution, remeasured. I did this with huge variety of problems. Us pilots
have the same failure patterns that businesses do. Things like "I usually
do x, but I was distracted by......." or "I didn't notice......"
The intelligent monitoring via glass cockpit is extremely effective
solution that will save lives. I'd estimate it makes flying around 10
times safer than the aircraft next to you.
-al wick
Artificial intelligence in cockpit, Cozy IV powered by stock Subaru 2.5
N9032U 200+ hours on engine/airframe from Portland, Oregon
Prop construct, Subaru install, Risk assessment, Glass panel design info:
http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:00:46 -0600 Charlie England
<ceengland@bellsouth.net> writes:
I run xp home & xp pro at home, xp pro at work supported by a Huge IT group (US Gov. agency). XP is much more reliable than the older versions; it only locks up once every week or two instead of every day like the older versions.
No thanks on MS in the cockpit, except for stuff like an iPaq that's non-essential.
Charlie
al p Wick wrote:
I suspect there are not Unix versions, but don't know for sure. You may
be able to find out from wonderware web site. There are no penalties for
using windows. Particularly newer versions.
-al wick
Artificial intelligence in cockpit, Cozy IV powered by stock Subaru 2.5
N9032U 200+ hours on engine/airframe from Portland, Oregon
Prop construct, Subaru install, Risk assessment, Glass panel design info:
http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:52:06 -0500 Ernest Christley
<echristley@nc.rr.com> writes:
al p Wick wrote:
I take advantage of off the shelf software and hardware.
Al, I've looked at you're glass panel page. I'm not sure, but it appears that you base the system on a software package from Wonderware? Are there Unix versions of this software available, or is it strickly a Microsoft shop? I couldn't find that information anywhere on their website.
-- ,|"|"|, |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta |
o| d |o www.ernest.isa-geek.org |
--
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:
http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
-al wick
Artificial intelligence in cockpit, Cozy IV powered by stock Subaru
2.5
N9032U 200+ hours on engine/airframe from Portland, Oregon
Prop construct, Subaru install, Risk assessment, Glass panel design info:
http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html
--
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
--
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
-al wick
Artificial intelligence in cockpit, Cozy IV powered by stock Subaru 2.5
N9032U 200+ hours on engine/airframe from Portland, Oregon
Prop construct, Subaru install, Risk assessment, Glass panel design info:
http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html
--
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
|
|