Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by d99kris 5346 days ago
The difference is that a pilot knows far more about an aircraft than the average driver knows about their vehicle.
1 comments

That's probably true, but the potential for a severe, un-recoverable issue is about as high. An aircraft is composed of hundreds of individually tracked components with associated information about how old the component is, how much it has flown, etc. Most of these parts have a mandatory expiration date at which point it is swapped out or sent for repair. A failure in the system which tracks all this data (which is what I work on) isn't quite as directly dangerous as, say, a bug in the on-board navigational software. But you can still end up flying around with an engine way past its intended expiration date far too easily.
Agreed. I know a fair bit about what keeps my single-engine piston aircraft in the sky, and many of the possible faults are routinely checked/confirmed OK during pre-flight inspection and/or run-up.

Still, I don't want to inadvertantly miss a 500-hr magneto IRAN, a wing spar or bolt NDT inspection interval, run my dry vacuum pump twice as long as I planned, or several other possible faults that aren't easily testable by other than maintenance technicians.

Point taken.