Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by fsloth 3168 days ago
"aerospace people can usually get it right "

Are you refererring to adherence to standards like Misra and DO-178B or something else?

2 comments

Yes, that kind of thing. The observed failure rate is pretty low although there have been a few high profile incidents (A400M, the whole Chinook fiasco http://www.computerweekly.com/blog/Public-Sector-IT/One-of-t... )

The Chinook fiasco is, like most quality issues, really a project management fiasco. The decision to do special software rather than get Boeing to do it, then a series of oversight failures on known problems.

Adherence to standards is a means to an end, but it is neither an end in itself, nor a guarantor of that end.
Sure, stupid tools are pointless. But usefull tools...

If the point is to reduce the number of errors then it helps to at least have a checklist of the errors, and someone reminding the team of the checklist. Checklist process is one of the easiest quality and safety tools to implement.

Having a premade checklist that makes sense in the form of a process plan makes things easier.

Exactly - a means to an end.

I'm not sure why you are mentioning "stupid tools", whatever they are - they would not even be means to an end.