Slashdot Mirror


Computer Error Grounds Flights In the UK

Rambo Tribble writes: Reuters reports that flights from Heathrow, Gatwick, and many other airports have been shut down "due to a computer failure." The information comes from European air traffic control body Eurocontrol. No official word as yet as to the nature of the failure. "One source told the BBC the problem was caused by a computer glitch that co-ordinates the flights coming into London and puts the flights in sequence as they come into land or take off. He described it as a 'flight planning tool problem.'" Incoming flights are still being accommodated.

68 comments

  1. "Computer" failure? by scott.todd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Every time I see those words, I want to know what OS.

    --
    Tea may be good but coffee is not tea.
    1. Re:"Computer" failure? by drpimp · · Score: 2

      Or could just be a software issue. "Computer Failure" is quite vague.

      --
      -- Brought to you by Carl's JR
    2. Re:"Computer" failure? by Tx · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Register is reporting that it's actually a power failure, apparently according to a Heathrow Airport spokesperson.

      “There is a power outage at the NATS control centre in Swanwick, which is affecting UK airspace. Flights are currently experiencing delays and we will update passengers as soon as we have more information," said a spokesman from Heathrow as the effects of the outage spread.

      You'd think that such systems would have fully redundant power supply infrastructure though, so maybe that's misinformation.

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
    3. Re:"Computer" failure? by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Why? Because it couldn't be an application problem, or a hardware problem, or a power problem, or a network problem, or even an admin problem? Must be the OS?

    4. Re:"Computer" failure? by scott.todd · · Score: 2

      Actually, any of your suggestions would be good if true. Anything other than "scary computers" being the cause would be nice.

      --
      Tea may be good but coffee is not tea.
    5. Re:"Computer" failure? by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Must be the OS?

      All of those are valid points.

      However, some of us are old enough to remember stuff like this:

      The Navy's Smart Ship technology may not be as smart as the service contends.

      Although PCs have reduced workloads for sailors aboard the Aegis missile cruiser USS
      Yorktown, software glitches resulted in system failures and crippled ship operations,
      according to Navy officials.

      Navy brass have called the Yorktown Smart Ship pilot a success in reducing manpower,
      maintenance and costs. The Navy began running shipboard applications under Microsoft
      Windows NT so that fewer sailors would be needed to control key ship functions.

      But the Navy last fall learned a difficult lesson about automation: The very
      information technology on which the ships depend also makes them vulnerable. The Yorktown
      last September suffered a systems failure when bad data was fed into its computers during
      maneuvers off the coast of Cape Charles, Va.

      Call it a well earned cynicism.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    6. Re:"Computer" failure? by ilguido · · Score: 1

      Windows 7 and Office 2010 according to the Register.

    7. Re:"Computer" failure? by Noah+Haders · · Score: 5, Funny

      sounds like we need a war on errorism.

    8. Re:"Computer" failure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You'd think that such systems would have fully redundant power supply infrastructure though, so maybe that's misinformation.

      Redundancy isn't failproof. The railroad here has complete redundancy in the signal controls, yet they had a signal blackout anyway. The actual computer worked, but the backup failed and then the redundancy controller started acting funny due to undefined inputs. They ended up making the working computer bypassing the redundancy system and restart all trains, but missing the backup computer to confirm data, they switched to a reduced train schedule (they never really explained why). That lasted for 4 days until the entire system was back to normal. They ended up saying it was due to faulty voltage and too high current, hence a power supply issue.

      Also once years ago they managed to crash both the main computer and the backup at the same time. Statistically that should happen once every 11k years or so.

      Yeah redundancy is good and it avoids service interruptions for most failures, but even the best system can fail.

    9. Re:"Computer" failure? by sycodon · · Score: 1

      Just remember to compile and compact those access files...twice a day.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    10. Re: "Computer" failure? by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      If OS equals YOUR FAVORITE OS then error is non OS related. Else OS is the cause of the error.

    11. Re:"Computer" failure? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      That wasn't the OS, but rather the application accepting a wrong input as valid.

    12. Re: "Computer" failure? by scott.todd · · Score: 1

      More like: if your favourite OS is the _cause_ of the error then never-ending arguments will be made that the error must generally be true for all computers and for any OS.

      --
      Tea may be good but coffee is not tea.
    13. Re:"Computer" failure? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Most redundancy in IT is done in a way with a more complex single point of failure. No redundancy is more reliable (but less resilient) than the massive over-redundancy we see in IT.

    14. Re:"Computer" failure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Call it a well earned cynicism.

      Call it a poorly researched article passed around by people who had no real experience in the situation and just jumped on the Anti-MS bandwagon because it had no IQ requirement.

    15. Re:"Computer" failure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here goes failure at understanding what statistics can be used for. At the end it was a statistics failure!

    16. Re:"Computer" failure? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Railroads get real sensitive about train collisions. The signal system is very carefully designed to make sure it fails safe, which means stopping the trains. If there's no reliable backup system, they're not likely to proceed as normal. Running fewer trains means they can be further apart, mitigating the effects of a not-entirely-trusted signal system.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    17. Re:"Computer" failure? by lippydude · · Score: 1

      @scott.todd: "Every time I see those words, I want to know what OS.

      does it begin with the " W " word?

    18. Re:"Computer" failure? by dfsmith · · Score: 1

      Anything other than "scary computers" being the cause would be nice.

      Skynet?

  2. Ooops by bazorg · · Score: 1

    The user interface looks strangely similar to Galaxians.

  3. Hope they have lots of parking space .... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    Hope they have lots of parking space for those airplanes, because they're going to pile up fast. And they're also going to be out of circulation for who knows how long?

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  4. restore & reboot by sribe · · Score: 2

    Don't they know about the backups on the planes in-flight? Shouldn't they just have one do a fly-by and drop an ethernet cable to a car pacing it on the runway below? Stupid Brits, don't know how to get things done in a crunch ;-)

    1. Re:restore & reboot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100 meters is enough to tether a circling Airbus A380, right? They might want to toss a switch inbetween two cables just to be safe.

    2. Re:restore & reboot by americanpossum · · Score: 1

      After my wife recently watched this show and I spent quite some time pointing out to her all of the nonrealistic things in the episode, it's nice to have someone else have the same observations. 8-)

    3. Re:restore & reboot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Us Brits were completely screwed. We didn't have the T-1000 to organize us.

  5. CNN reported it was a power problem by david.emery · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And anecdotally, it seems many, if not most, of the ATC failures I remember hearing about in the US have also been power problems. These are kinda hard to test, as I wrote to a friend, "The on-duty ATC controllers get irate when you 'pull the big power plug' on their shift."

    Usually failures like these are chains of events, e.g. "UPS ran out of batteries more rapidly than expected, and then we couldn't get the generators started."

    Power problems are what doomed Fukushima, too, by the way.

    1. Re:CNN reported it was a power problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      According to the summary they were using a computer glitch to co-ordinate the flights. I suppose that the power problem fixed the glitch and broke flight planning?

    2. Re:CNN reported it was a power problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The on-duty ATC controllers get irate when you 'pull the big power plug' on their shift."

      I saw that movie.

    3. Re:CNN reported it was a power problem by idbeholda · · Score: 1

      Power problems are what doomed Fukushima, too, by the way.

      Oh. I was under the impression that it was a result of the widely documented/reported combination of a tsunami/earthquake (9.0).

    4. Re:CNN reported it was a power problem by david.emery · · Score: 3, Informative

      The pumps lost power after the backup systems failed (ran out of battery, and the generators were knocked out), and that's what caused the reactors to overheat and meltdown. If power had been retained to the pumps, the major problems would have been averted.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      "The switching stations that provided power from the three backup generators located higher on the hillside failed when the building that housed them flooded.[68] Power for control systems switched over to batteries that were designed to last about eight hours.[102] Further batteries and mobile generators were dispatched to the site. They were delayed by poor road conditions and the first arrived only at 21:00 11 March,[95][103] almost six hours after the tsunami."

    5. Re:CNN reported it was a power problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually failures like these are chains of events, e.g. "UPS ran out of batteries more rapidly than expected, and then we couldn't get the generators started."

      And with the global environment of anti-civil service (labelled as "big government" in the US) and extended "budget holidays" (i.e. no money to spend whatsoever) or austerity in Europe, they likely had no budget for non-sexy stuff like maintenance work such as replacing old lead-acid (maybe AGM, maybe sealed gel, but Pb all the same) batteries in UPS, or practice sensible engine maintenance for any emergency generators.

      If the senior civil servants can't sell the idea of a political photo-op or corporate kickbacks, too much routine government work is left unfunded. That's also why new projects are easier to get a budget approved for, than keeping an adequate system working.

    6. Re:CNN reported it was a power problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IF THE REACTORS HAD BEEN DESIGNED CORRECTLY IN THE FIRST PLACE THEY WOULD HAVE SCRAMMED AND NOT NEEDED COOLING!!!

      duh!

      second, if they hadn't cheaped out and built a lower seawall and reactors lower than surveyed, then yeah the aux cooling would have kept working.

      morons

    7. Re:CNN reported it was a power problem by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Those were not the only backup pumps though. They had mobile pumps (fire engines) on site, but the emergency cooling system was broken so they didn't work.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  6. Another move from North Korea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Villain Kim Jong Un makes his next move with his team of super-hackers.

    1. Re:Another move from North Korea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess that would be an "'air cut"

    2. Re:Another move from North Korea? by scott.todd · · Score: 1

      Can't mod you up since I've already commented. But I do think your joke is underrated. Almost as funny as the "war on errorism" joke earlier in these threads.

      --
      Tea may be good but coffee is not tea.
  7. Mostly I want to know by jpellino · · Score: 1

    who kicked the power cord out of the wall or failed to renew the license for Excel because you know, you can use Excel for any data challenge you're not willing to research. i.e., "Computer glitches" are notoriously hard to pin down and are a great diversionary tactic.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  8. Re:"Computer" failure - yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    No, reports now are a computer failure - and the Reg now reports they run MS stuff - seems like the dodgy update that MS retracted is the smoking gun.

  9. Re:"Computer" failure - yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank you for your uninformed and nonsensical speculation. People like you are what makes /. the enlightened community it is renowned to be.

  10. Re:"Computer" failure - yes by Skiron · · Score: 2

    That was me. Occam's razor.

  11. Re:"Computer" failure - MUST REBOOT! by scott.todd · · Score: 2

    Let me guess: Systems were down momentarily while doing a hard reboot, hence the power "outage," in an attempt to resolve an otherwise unsolvable Windows computer glitch?

    --
    Tea may be good but coffee is not tea.
  12. Propably some bean-counter's "success"... by gweihir · · Score: 0

    Likely some supplier had their rates downgraded long enough that they could not deliver good quality anymore. These "savings" are always exceedingly expensive in the long run.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  13. not likely by slashmydots · · Score: 2

    That explanation isn't likely. They have pen and paper backup solutions for simply putting planes in order for landing and takeoff. To shut down to that degree, it would have had to be something more important like radar shutting down so planes might collide.
    Or they're idiots and didn't have a backup pen and paper solution that was used for decades before computers and all staff should have been trained on.

    1. Re:not likely by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Or they're idiots and didn't have a backup pen and paper solution that was used for decades before computers and all staff should have been trained on.

      I'm betting on that one. We've become dependent on computers for air traffic control and I'll bet the manual system hasn't been trained in years.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:not likely by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      I suspect they do have a backup soloution (paper based or otherwise) but using it results in a much lower capacity than the main system. After all why would you build a new computer system if their wasn't a significant benefit to doing so?

      If you have an incident that reduces capacity significantly in a system that is close to capacity then you have to prioritise. The priority for ATC is going to be to get planes already in the air safely onto the ground before they run out of fuel. Planes on the ground can wait.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    3. Re:not likely by SolitaryMan · · Score: 1

      If it was, would you trust it? I mean, people haven't been using it during their daily routines for years, so it is definitely not at super reliable level. Sure, they should be able to do it in case of emergencies, but under normal conditions it is much safer to just ground the flights.

      --
      May Peace Prevail On Earth
  14. hacked by sony? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe someone at the airport dared to download a torrent and then got hit by sony :)

  15. systemd? by LocutusOfBorg1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I guess they just switched to systemd. :-)

    1. Re:systemd? by scott.todd · · Score: 1

      Haha, the "d" stands for "down" in this case?

      --
      Tea may be good but coffee is not tea.
  16. Change Control by sycodon · · Score: 1

    I'll just make this one little change here...it won't affect anything.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:Change Control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it won't affect anything, why bother making the change?

      (I hear you .. too much of my life wasted tracking down and fixing uncontrolled changes that "won't affect anything".)

  17. Re:"Computer" failure - yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It must be difficult being an on call windows shill. So many problems...

  18. Microsoft lumps of coal for xmas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KB 3000061, KB 2553154, 2726958, KB 3004394.

  19. Power failure to the computer by Martin+Spamer · · Score: 1

    Not a computer failure as such, according to my source.

    1. Re:Power failure to the computer by afidel · · Score: 2

      So stupid, it's not hard to achieve damn near 100% uptime on power, get feeds from two substations A and B, put each one through two UPS's and use two different sets of generators with different fuel sources as backup so you have A, A', B, and B', use a transfer switch to feed your equipment's A side supply from A with A' in reserve, and the B side supply from B' and have B in reserve (that way one of your power sources stays up without a transfer switchover even if you have a fuel problem). If you want to further reduce the chances of an outage at the cost of some increased complexity use different UPS vendors and different transfer switch vendors so you don't have a possible common design flaw in both paths. The whole setup would probably cost as much as shutting down Heathrow for around 10 minutes. I've got this setup minus the redundant generators and I'm just running a midsized enterprise, not a freaking critical piece of national (and international) infrastructure.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  20. You know the old hacker saying... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Are your planes belong to us.

  21. It's not a bug, it's a feature! by jtara · · Score: 1

    the problem was caused by a computer glitch that co-ordinates the flights

    It's great to see for once that a glitch has been doing something worth-while, rather than just causing problems.

    It's unfortunate, then, that this glitch has fallen-back to the errant ways of most glitches, which typically just cause trouble, without doing something useful.

    I'm not sure it is time for a 12-step program for glitches, though, because I think most glitches do not want to change.

  22. Approach sequencing by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

    Older systems did that by hand but newer systems have algorithms which guide the trajectories of aircraft on approach so they finish up in a nice sequence. Thats what it sounds like in the summary.

  23. British Porn Filter by PPH · · Score: 2

    ... probably figured that "landing an airplane" was a euphemism for one of the prohibited acts.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  24. Bring back the 60s by mspohr · · Score: 1

    Looks like they are using hand me down software from the US from the 1960s written in a language called Jovial.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
    "Prof Thomas said the NAS system was written using a now defunct computer language called Jovial, meaning Nats has to train programmers in Jovial just to maintain the antiquated software."

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    1. Re:Bring back the 60s by PPH · · Score: 1

      hand me down software from the US from the 1960s written in a language called Jovial.

      Who's laughing now?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  25. Glitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw people at Oslo Gardermoen airport get thier London flights cancelled.

  26. Old specs by SimonInOz · · Score: 1

    When I worked on the radar system for south east England in 1977, the requirements included allowing for a madman in the computer room with an axe.

    It was supposed to fail back gradually, eventually all the way to analog passive radar.

    Whatever happened to decent requirements?

    And get off my lawn!

    --
    "Cats like plain crisps"
  27. That awkward moment when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...you use atan instead lf atan2 in your autopilot software.