Re:Software Won’t Fix Boeing’s ‘Faulty’ Airframe
by dTal on Thursday March 28, 2019 @05:53AM
(#19510681)
>Angle of attack for example can be approximated with an accelerometer and gyro
I'm prepared to be wrong but that sounds impossible to me. A steady-state descending stall is inertially indistinguishable from cruise.
Re:Software Won’t Fix Boeing’s ‘Faulty’ Airframe
by londons_explore on Thursday March 28, 2019 @05:31PM
(#19516848)
You're right - you need to combine with altimeter or GPS, and for more accuracy you can also combine with wind direction forecasts or airspeed measurements.
The point is, there are lots of data sources, and with even a subset of them, it's possible to fly the plane to a safe landing.
Re:Software Won’t Fix Boeing’s ‘Faulty’ Airframe
by piva00 on Thursday March 28, 2019 @10:18AM
(#19512403)
But then the motor could break, and so it goes. The more moving parts around you have, the more failure modes you have.
Re:Software Won’t Fix Boeing’s ‘Faulty’ Airframe
by londons_explore on Thursday March 28, 2019 @05:34PM
(#19516870)
If the motor breaks, the sensor has failed.
Failure isn't really the problem - it's silent failure which is deadly.
Instead, the sensors should detect failure, for example by using a motor to detect if the vane is stuck and cannot turn freely.
The flight controls should also be able to fly even if all sensors of a certain type have failled. Angle of attack for example can be approximated with an accelerometer and gyro well enough to keep the plane in the air.