Slashdot Mirror
Crashing an In-Flight Entertainment System
rabblerouzer writes "Hugh Thompson, who was interviewed by Slashdot on the dangers of e-voting, now has a cool blog entry on how he was able to bring down the gaming/movie console on an airplane. He calls it one of the most interesting examples of a software 'abuse case' he has ever seen." Fortunately the IFE system is totally disjoint from the avionics.
I fly across the pacific a few times every year and they always warn people to take it easy and be patient with the IFE "or it will crash" - which is certainly true - without trying I managed to spend 10 hours staring at a Windows CE "some thing bad happened" dialog box .... couldn't even turn the damn thing off when I wanted to sleep
I suspect it might be fairly common for seat-back computers to crash?
I don't know enough about Linux to understand what it said on my screen when it was trying (and failing) to boot back up again:
http://washedashore.com/misc/inflight_error.jpg
(This was April 23, 2005, on a flight from Bucuresti Romania to NYC.)
-Ben
And when you compile the code in release, where is your friend now?
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Can anyone intuit the airline? Because without an airline name, I call bullshit on this story. I would guess it had to be business class, and probably a foriegn carrier, if the story is to be believed.
Dude, I think I can see my house from here.
Interesting stuff this critical code. When I started out as a grad at a large Aerospace company we were given shiploads of Flight Control Computer code to unit test for a new(ish) fighter aircraft. Most of the stuff we worked with was what you have described as 'Level A' code but I didn't really understand what it all meant at the time.
Anyway, the level of testing required was very, very high. I say that even though we were grads working on it, because it was not our choice what to test and what to leave, and they were done multiple times with different people, the the branches, lines run etc compared. It was the lowest level of the software tests and everything was in modules about 30 lines long that needed 100% coverage, every logical combination tested out etc. Plus the languages they used (ADA95, fortran(77?) and assembly) were cut down to remove anything too untestable. I think 'while' loops were out because, as opposed to 'for's, there is a chance of a infinite loop. That sort of stuff. Would be a nightmare to code in.
In not sure how other FCC's usually are, but interestingly this one had 4 CPU's with a fifth 'controlling' one or something and basically each calculation would be performed on all 4 then the results correlated and the majority answer taken. I guess to protect it from a freakish glitch or maybe some deliberate interferance? Not sure, but surely accurate.
Fly-By-Wire - It's not just the software that crashes.
Dammit! I had a good one.
SwissAir 111 went down because the in-flight entertainment & gambling system had been rushed into service, and due to its design overheated and burned down the plane in-flight. This was its design: a separate computer for each seat. The computers (presumably single cards) were located in the ceiling near the front of the passenger compartment. So were the avionics wires. The entertainment/gambling devices overheated, caught fire and the plane crashed near Nova Scotia.
Yes, the wiring insulation burned and brought down the plane. A friend's wife was on that plane, so I have an interest beyond the technical.
Another interesting event was the crash of an Airbus flight control system, resulting in an inflight rebooting message; the pilots flew on in manual.
Greed. SwissAir is no more.
Yes, but it was due to them overpaying their employees and not controlling other expenses as well - a problem many European state run airlines have. Look at Alitalia for example - they could lease planes with crews for less than it costs to fly their own. Europe's carriers are heading towards teh same consolidation and liquidation taht US ones have expereineced and only a handful will survive. I think BA Lufthansa and Air France will probably be the last standing.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
There is no reasonable scenario which would ever put the IFE system in a position to affect the avionics
You are committing the logical fallacy of "Argumentum ad Stultum": argument from stupidity.
Arguments that commit this fallacy have the form:
It would be stupid to do X
No one would ever do anything stupid
------------
Therefore no one would ever do X
The second premise is so obviously false it hardly needs mention.
So, simply because there is no reasonable scenario that would put the IFE system in a position of affecting the avionics does not mean there is no probable scenario in which this could occur. It requires good engineering, good management and yes, good luck, to ensure independence. Every engineer knows that we must try to eliminate luck from the process and must never, ever rely on it, but also that it will always be a factor.
One obvious way in which the IFE could affect the avionics is via coupled grounds. Grounding in aircraft is never simple, and maintaining fully independent power supplies has been a challenge for IFE and avionics engineers. IIRC the 777 was delayed for a while due to the need to do some redesign on the power systems to ensure independence was retained. In any system so complex there will always be an element of luck, despite the engineer's best efforts.
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.