One may claim a decade (or more) of DO-178B experience, but try speaking about aircraft and you might as well be talking to a wall. At least that has been my experience. Because getting that piece of code out of the door is so important - and exhausting - aircraft knowledge among aerospace software engineers is near zero. And this has nothing to do with the fact that most engineers working of a DO-178B project are not aerospace engineers.
Not every one will agree that knowing about aircraft is that important for a software engineer. I wonder why? I have faced similar arguments from car/mobike owners: "Just because I drive a car does not mean I need to read the maintenance manual." I wonder if similar situation exists in the the automobile industry. Would a software engineer working in the automobile domain claim that s/he couldn't care less about how a differential works? May be distributing free copies of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance will help :)
Difference in perspective has a deep influence on the quality of work. Who do you think enjoys the work more (and as a result does quality work): the brick layer or the cathedral builder? And why do you suppose this does not apply to the aerospace software engineer? Or for that matter to the software engineer in any domain?
Now, if you are convinced that you need to learn more about aircraft, let us work out the best way of gaining such knowledge. You could start with a Flight Mechanics text book - I guarantee you will never finish that book; Flight Without Formula is perhaps an exception.
I, on the other hand, prefer reading about accidents. After all, the whole idea behind DO-178B is to ensure that the aircraft does not suffer a catastrophic/major/minor failure. So, here is what I recommend. Visit the Aviation Safety Network. It has a listing of all known accidents since 01-Jan-1943. Browse through the accident records and pick up the ones that relate to Bowing or Airbus. Each record has a detailed description of the accident and results of the investigation. Some accidents are due to software deficiencies, like this one involving Boeing 737 in Amsterdam. Want more details? Click through to the detailed investigation report (opens a PDF): Your nerves start tingling as you read:
Not all certified Boeing 737 operating software versions for the autothrottle and flight control computers respond to an erroneous radio altitude signal in the same way. This situation is undesirable, especially in cases where an airline is using several versions that respond differently and without having informed its pilots.
As you explore the reports and google for the words you do not understand, you will see your knowledge grow leaps and bound.
By the way, the lastest air accidents - like the Qantas A380 T900 blowout - are listed too (the site is well maintained and regularly updated) but obviously do not have much details as of now.
A regular reading habit of this website will turn a 'brick layer' into a 'cathedral builder'.
Comments