Slashdot Mirror
Software Glitches Cause Airport Delays in Britain
bnoise writes "There has been air traffic delays of up to 6 hours today above UK (and this includes north atlantic flights). A BBC News article points out the reasons: a software upgrade. Another article gives more general information about the delays. Companies pin-pointed are IBM (initial development) and Lockheed Martin. If only they were using Open Source Software in the aviation industry... By the way, is there any Open Source project in the aviation sector? A search on Freshmeat gives back 5 projects."
I seriously doubt that open source is the solution to this problem. Honestly, there are glitches in OS projects, too, that get by review. I don't like this spin put on this story... OS is *not* the holy grail of software development!
;)
Oh well, time to burn some karma for a neede rant
Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
If only they were using Open Source Software in the aviation industry.
Then they'd have to waste their time arguing the merits of gairport versus kairport...
Remember kids- "Open Source" apps have glitches, too...
Open Source isn't a magic bullet for this kind of thing. Software Engineering is the solution to this kind of thing, and no one has a monopoly on that. The amount of crap code in the Open Source world and proprietary world is, in my experience, roughly equal. (Actually, I think there is a bit more crap code in Open Source, but it doesn't get used much). The difference is that with Open Source/Free Software you know what you are getting and with closed/proprietary you don't.
> If only they were using Open Source Software
> in the aviation industry...
Then what? They'd never have to upgrade? Yeah, never upgrading is something OSS users are well known for.
- A flight planning tool for pilots
- Perl module for processing aviation weather reports.
- Parses FAA weather briefs into individual NOTAMs/METARs/PIREPs/TAFs/etc.
- Local weather data accumulation for Web sites
- A Linux port of the X-Plane flight simulator.
and an ATC system for trans-atlantic airspace.I think we're being trolled!
This is one news story that's worth looking at.
I really like the little photo captioned "Skies in UK Becoming Increasingly Crowded" that shows about five jets at the same time!
I can't believe that's a real picture. If its, they're begging for some collisions RSN.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
There are flight control/traffic control projects in open source..
Anybody who has caught transport to LA and flew out did so on open source traffic control all the way from the train transport to flying out..
the software runs on Linux currently....
There awas even an article in several linux magazines..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
Oh, come on, just because we live and breathe open source software, doesnt mean that it wouldnt be bug free. Advocation is one thing, zealotry is nother. GEEZ!
It's situation normal for the UK. I can't remember a public-sector IT project that hasn't run hugely over budget, over schedule, and most of them are eventually abandoned. Tony Collins (writer for Compuer Weekly) has written books on the subject. And yet still we carry on repeating the same stupid PHB-driven mistakes as last year. Afterward there's an enquiry by the National Audit Office, various private sector companies are scapegoated, and yet are welcomed back with open arms when they tender for the next mega-project. NATS (national air-traffic control system) is already a disaster of this type - wildly over budget and > 5 years late (IIRC). Yes folks, FIVE YEARS LATE. Actually the chief villains are EDS, Anders - uh - Indenture, Cap Gemini et al. Having worked at Logica for a while (a similar "IT Services" house) I have to say I would never go back to such an organistation... nowhere is mediocrity, political manouvering, lack of technical knowledge, and being told what to do by one's suppliers so exalted as in public sector IT projects. Of course Blair are just starting to fawn over Microsoft (having been granted an audience by Bill Gates: the notion of there being some sort of backlash or alternative to Microsoft doesn't seem to have crossed their minds.
Sigh. And tax just went up 1%, allegedly to fund the health service, but if they just stopped pissing away hundreds of millions per project on stupid obvious mistakes they'd have MORE than enough to fund education, health, law & order etc.
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
for the air traffic control system for the airport you're about to land at.... and you notice a bug.... or a long jump... :-)
Perhaps there are some things it's better not to know!
Hexayurt - open source refugee shelter,
Ok, stop slashdotting the poor guys server. His wife is fully clothed in all the pictures.
...how, precisely, would this solve the problem?
I'm sure, if it progressed anything at all like Mozilla, we'd get a production-quality air traffic control system in, oh, 50 years. Meanwhile, I would have to walk to Australia.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
They're talking about a couple of things. Southern UK mainland general air traffic (excluding TMAs of airports etc.) was handled a centre at West Drayton. This was exceptionally long in the tooth, generating lots of fun stories about forty year-old computers etc.
They decided a while back to replace West Drayton, and built "the world's most advanced" air traffic control centre, at Swanwick. Many years after it was due, Swanwick opened for business recently.
Of course the didn't just switch over and shut down West Drayton. To the press, West Drayton was a "backup". In fact it was (is) handling a bunch of movements. And a couple of months back, they had a large system crash. This was, as usual, sold as "problems with old computers" playing up. From inside NATS (National Air Traffic Service) one hears a different story: something about sysadmin (if you will) error knocking the thing over.
But Swanick is late and expensive. At heart, it's an IT project, after all...
Sorry to make this sound "Katz"-ish, but try and follow.
You make an air-traffic control program open source. An airport decides to use it. A quality hacker, yet terrorist, jumps into the project (honestly, how difficult is it to get into an Open Source project? I haven't heard of one needing a background check). His code is quality for a long time and gets put into the program. He becomes a trusted member. He pulls a "DirectTV" hack (pieces of code, in several different packages that work once the package is complete) that causes many deaths.
Yes, this could happen in the software company that creates the software now, but it would be a lot easier for a terrorist to get into an open source project...
Just another example/reason that Open Source isn't the answer for everything (don't get me wrong, I'm an open source advocate myself, I just know some of its limits).
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
From the article:
"But software is advancing at a tremendous pace, so it becomes obsolete every 18 months."
Um, no, it's hardware that doubles in speed every 18 months. The approval rate for new aircraft technologies (at least in the states) is unbearably slow. This is clearly a weak excuse for the correctly identified problem:
"The basic stumbling block was not to get off-the-shelf components and software"
Maturity couldn't be a more critical issue to this kind of software. Where half a day's downtime can cause inconvenience to 10% of the population of your island, and ignoring a problem can get people killed, you need a proven winner. Software for managing the traffic over the UK should not even have been considered unless it had been proven for years of service controlling airspace over something noticably less crowded than one of the hubs of global trade.
After the upgrade from Win2k to XP, someone forgot to turn off the 'Auto Update' feature. The systems last night decided to download and install the IE rollup patch and now their IE can't run the AirPorter.v1.jar.
The bright side of the story is that the air traffic controllers will no longer be able to have their AOL instant messenger open due to compatability issues, which makes sure their focus will be on the planes flying about.
---
Don't piss me off or I'll write a shell script to do your job..
bnois writes, "The California Highway Patrol has been reporting that during rush hour today several large bridges in San Francisco, including the Golden Gate Bridge, have had sections collapse, sending cars and trucks hurtling to their demise below." If only some qualified engineers had drawn up the plans in their free time and let the general public view them first for errors. Does anyone know of some plans like that on Fresharch?
Linux is a great example of the open-source mindset at work. And there are other great examples of open source projects that work. But the idea that Open Source is the cure-all for all projects big and small is ludicrous. Whoever wrote "If only they were using Open Source Software in the aviation industry" has obviously never been involved in a 100-person project that spanned years and was responsible for critical operations.
Declaring Open Source to be a cure for all ills is like treating every disease with the same pill. It just doesn't work that way. Open Source software is great when people can unite for a common cause (usually against a common competitor, which Microsoft convienently happens to be) and produce a good product. But thre's no evidence that an Open Source project would have worked where this upgrade failed.
Closed source might not be your model of choice, but it solves the same problem. Software engineers writing code which is never released to the public don't do their jobs any worse because of it. You might think that the purity of the code is flawed by company management bent on releasing buggy products for profit, but the open source alternative is a Mozillian, buggy product that is years behind schedule and never quite ready. Don't assume that just because a model you don't like has a failure the model that you do like would have worked.
Have fun: Join D.N.A. (National Dyslexics Association)
If only they were using Open Source Software in the aviation industry...
Since they used commercial (aka. evil) software, they were able to pass the blame to an entity other than themselves. Maybe they are trying to publicly state that they did nothing wrong (other than choose IBM). The airport was 100% overbudget so it would make sense to pass on the blame whenever possible.
If they had chosen oss, it doesn't mean that this so called technical glitch wouldn't have happened. No software is bug free.
Now they can bitch at Lockheed and perhaps get it fixed fast. If it was oss software, I doubt you would be guaranteed to get a team dedicated to fix a problem.
"Fix wha? I got an exam next week, sorry dudes gotta study."
- or -
"I have a big project at my real job. I'll fix it when I get around to it."
The economic value of the open source development model is that directed validation is unnecessary.
The code is released, and the horde of developers does trial-by-fire validation for you. They run it in real-world usage and report bugs itinerantly for others to fix or sign-off on.
That's not feasible for programs where using the code means implementing it in an embedded system responsible for safety. The downloaders won't have the hardware to test it on, and putting it in use to test it misses the point of validating it.
But it's not as though the validation systems in use today are much better. Simulators and debugger-controlled code exercisers create sort of a chicken-and-egg problem. Recursive review decreases the probability of certain kinds of errors, but not to nil.
--Blair
I agree with you on the "Open source would not solve this problem" bit... Sometimes I wonder if the editors put up that kind of stuff just to laugh at it.
The mozilla jab is low, though. Yeah, it's been a while, but it's a damn fine result. Besides, it was basically written from scratch, and the original netscape took just as long to get to where *it* was when they announced the founding of the mozilla project...
The Free desktop that Just Works
This is why I never use software for mission-critical applications. Software is buggy. It's the truth. It's a law or something. Buggy. Doesn't work.
Hardware, OTOH, rings true. Hardware will never let you down. It is built for the long haul, and will always be loyal by your side. I'd go to the end of the world with hardware.
I won't let software walk the dog.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
I couldn't agree more...
Ever try to get the Debian group to commit to a date for anything? They're practically indignant about putting out software when they feel like it, and if you don't like that you should go elsewhere. Yeah, I want folks like that backing my mission critical systems (I'm just using the Debian group as an example. There are other development groups out there who have a similar attitude toward release schedules and updates)...
When the OSS world grows up I'll trust them with my flights. Until then, they can make editors and MP3 players all they want and I'll be perfectly happy...
Having lived in Australia for more than two years, I'd say your walk would be worth it! :-)
I hate to say it, but that's a bunch of crap. Do you mean to tell me that in the history of open source software there has NEVER been a release that contained a bug? If that's the case, then why do we have things like Red Carpet? It's software. Bugs happen. That's life. Whether you're talking about closed source or open source, there will always be problems. Unfortunately, the open source community seems to think that they have the answer to all of technology's problems.
How is the OS they run on the departures board systems anything to do with the air traffic control? That's sillier than criticising the code behind Slashdot because I'm posting this from a Windows machine.
GROGGS: alive and well and living in
How do you suggest the average coder puts his copy of OpenATC to the test? Start controlling planes from his bedroom? Maybe have all the kids in the neighborhood clear their bicycles and bigwheels for takeoff? I wonder if the testing phase for ATC software is a bigger effort than the actual development.
The new system was five years late, and now we're the only country in the world to have privately owned air traffic control.
Look at our rail network and then tell me that's a good idea.
If airports started using open source software, it would make it that much easier for terrorists to recalibrate the Dulles International ILS beam to 200 feet below sea level.
Actually, if you hold you mouse over it for a second, the alt text of "Photomontage" comes up. Still, they should have made it more obvious.
0 / 993586.stm
Story with pic, BTW, is here http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_199300
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
I'd just like to respond to the myriad posts that seem to assume that open source development is only done by part-time programmers in their basement who post version 0.0.2 of their foobarnator to Freshmeat. We're talking about about a billion-dollar project to develop software for one country's air traffic control center. Is it so hard to imagine that countries could collaborate on the development of this kind of software? At some point, a plane from the UK will be handed off to French ATC. I'd feel safer knowing that the billion dollars spent on development had gone to world-class programmers, rather than to regional pork barrel.
The "who do you sue" argument is rubbish. Until software engineering lives up to its name, open source development can be considered no worse than the rest of the industry. EULAs on shrink-wrap software and contracts for custom software inevitably disclaim any warranties. If you're an important customer, you can expect a bug fix, but you can't sue for damages.
If only they were using Open Source Software in the aviation industry...
Because of course, upgrading Open Source software never causes problems. In fact, if they were using Linux, it would be so efficient the passengers would be arriving before they left.
Whilst "If only they were using Open Source Software in the aviation industry..." is stupidity beyond belief, ... there are actually a few open source air traffic control programs available....
OpenATC
Flightgear is an open-source flight sim that kicks ass. Check out some screen shots - especially this one or download it.
I don't think the open-source activists were trying to say that the ATC software would be bug free if it was open source, i think they were trying to say, that an ATC system should be something the government is incharge of - since it involves stopping large bits of metal hitting civillians its definatly not a project that you should source out to any old company, and especially not a company who will write closed proprietory software, or hires a bunch of lay-abouts who take 6 months off, and write the whole thing in a week. (Ive done projects that way - they are bad). IBM are not exactly faultless (my replacement Deskstar just arrived). The software should be open source since it is probably funded by tax-payers and generally, the population wants to be able to see the code that is keeping them safe everyday, even if they have little input. For all we know with the capitalists outthere, IBM could have been sold to Al'Qaeda.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
If only they were using Open Source Software in the aviation industry...
Yeah, I'd like to see how quickly the Open Source community could fix the problem during the opening weekend of Episode II.
'Same speed C but faster'
but these are queued behnd each other, usually at least 2-3 minutes apart
No, dear, not at Heathrow, it's 90 seconds max usually. Just sit there with a watch and count them. Or listen in on the radio.
If there's a 3 minute gap it's because they've lost one.
Read these links regarding Autocoding and the problem with private efforts
From the article:
"But software is advancing at a tremendous pace, so it becomes obsolete every 18 months."
Um- software is not obsolete if it continues to do the job it was designed to do, in fact it is trusted more if it has been reliable for so long.
I would feel safer trusting my life to an 8 year old DOS program than to a 6 month old Linux or Windows one.
The only way I can see an old bespoke package being worse than it used to be is if it had to handle a lot more requests than it used to, since it will probably scale poorly.
graspee
Absolutely! Hell, Linux can't detect the sound card in my laptop(made by one of the biggest companies in the world, that has put a lot of money into Linux - oh, and BTW, Alan Cox owns one of the self same models). So pardon me if I don't accept it as theNirvana of the computing world. I still lov eit as an idea - and I'm close yo getting some OpenBSD into produciton in my company - but you know, this story deserves more that just some rant about open/free software.
The problems in the UK air traffic control, are, to my mind, general problems associated with any project of this enormous scale. Before West Drayton was transferred to Swannick, it was already handling more flights than Swannick had been designed for - so it's no surprise to me that they stillhave problems.
Oh, and the reaon for the delay is not that there is any risk to passengers; when the sstems fail they go back to pieces of paper, and all works safely - just slowly!
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
- Our nations' taxes paid for it.
- Our nations' safety depend on it.
- Our travellers' time is valuable.
- The developers need to know that the world is watching their keystrokes,
That is why it is correct to open the code to public view.so that they are encouraged to press the correct buttons.
This is the reason you get dialtone reliably when you pick up the 'phone.
It would work for Air Traffic Control too.