aeronautic

I took a quick look at a rework station in an aeronautic company in France, all leaded solder.

Unstable aeronautic design and lack of redundant sensors was the real problem.

I don't need to be an aeronautic engineer to know that a person with no such background should not throw hunches about designing planes.

So real aeronautic engineers need to be part of the software teams. People who would at least have a chance to detect fatal flaws in the specs they are supposed to implement, if they were not part of the spec creation from the beginning.

I'm 53, and I design 3D synthetic worlds with physic simulators in python and C++ for the aeronautic industry. That's on top of still running strong webdev with the latest tech.

Note: the old systems are now virtualized but we still need them, I work in the aeronautic industry and these are the time scales we are working with. I don't know of any replacement, at least not one with that level of adoption.

That has already been done for a subset in the aeronautic industry - Work with the comitte to make C++ itself safer, which Google is already doing.

We created the specifications with companies in the energy and aeronautic fields. They are excited and waiting for this new product.

I'm not an aeronautic engineer so I can't explain why but the ride was always smooth on 747s even in otherwise non-ideal conditions. I've flown the 787 since then and I don't even think it handles as well, but not enough data.

You mentioned the aeronautic industry but I'm not familiar enough with it to imagine the kinds of things you would need to run remotely.

For example, although most of the world uses the metric system, I think in aeronautics they still use feet to measure altitude. US could migrate to metric independently of the aeronautic standards.

Bankrupting Boeing does not destroy 140 years of aviation technology or make aeronautic engineers forget their training. Neither does it erase the thousands of aircraft flying today.

I am not an aeronautic engineer, just a motoglider pilot wannabe. If it looks borderline silly to even a man like me, it's scary to imagine what wool they must have pulled over for their mentors and industry advisers to go with that.

I am not an aerodynamic engineer but I am an ultralight pilot and work for an aeronautic company, and for me, the design doesn't make much sense. First, having the fuel in the wings is the most obvious choice, it stabilizes the plane and reduces strain on the wing spar.

So they don't need as many skilled workers, they will also cut down aeronautic engineers, software engineers, accountants, lawyers, etc. There are lots of industries that support them too.

Their job was seen as needing to know everything that affected the operation and aeronautic behavior of the craft first and foremost. That's where I believe these Airworthyness Directives, though accurate, failed.

Look at aeronautic applications where it just has to work for a few hours until you have to reboot everything. But anyway, even if development costs amortize with giant quantities, it still requires complex machinery and a trained workforce for manufacturing.

I have no direct knowledge here, but I've heard from multiple sources that whereas past aircraft had air gaps between aeronautic and IFE systems, newer aircraft rely on a firewall to block traffic from the IFE side to the aeronautic side.