The funny thing is, the news articles got stuck on the least significant (but funny) detail. The main emphasis should have been on the fact that lots of people had noticed serious problems with the design, but one stubborn guy decided to roll the dice anyway. Well, you reap what you sow.
Using off the shelf consumer electronics for safety critical applications is fine.
In this case the controller is engineered to work well for a resonable time.
Ok, the controller is not waterproof, but if you get water inside a sub, you have larger problems than moving it, and you have other ways of triggering an emergency blow.
it’s the same functionality but cheaper and easier to use, it’s such a good idea the navy has been trying to switch everything they can to off the shelf stuff.
Using off the shelf consumer electronics in safety critical applications is never OK.
I would argue that the consumer electronics had more testing and engineering experience behind them than the structural parts of the sub…
The funny thing is, the news articles got stuck on the least significant (but funny) detail. The main emphasis should have been on the fact that lots of people had noticed serious problems with the design, but one stubborn guy decided to roll the dice anyway. Well, you reap what you sow.
Using off the shelf consumer electronics for safety critical applications is fine.
In this case the controller is engineered to work well for a resonable time.
Ok, the controller is not waterproof, but if you get water inside a sub, you have larger problems than moving it, and you have other ways of triggering an emergency blow.
Off the shelf consumer electronics were not the problem.
it’s the same functionality but cheaper and easier to use, it’s such a good idea the navy has been trying to switch everything they can to off the shelf stuff.
So is Boeing
idk if Boeing is, but either way the issues they’ve had have been software and maintenance issues.
Got it, hiring Ivan from nearest kolhoz to kolhoz submarine into existance.