 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General AviationLearningIFRHomebuiltSoaringUltralightRotary-wingCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics BoatsCarsMotorcyclesMore Topics ... |
Aviation Forum / General / Learning / June 2008Re: Future of Electronics In Aviation
Le Chaud Lapin <jaibuduvin@gmail.com> wrote in news:803d4498-0f05-43aa-a881-dd7eda51ba32@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com: > On Jun 21, 10:47 am, Michael Ash <m...@mikeash.com> wrote: >> In rec.aviation.student Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote: >> >> > From: Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@gmail.com> > >> Very nice, and applies well to software too. Of course it's not true >> that software has 0 marginal cost. There are support costs, which can >> be significant. > > I said material cost, not marginal cost. > >> But let's say that software really does have zero marginal cost. >> Well, this is extremely *bad* news for the use of software in GA, not >> good news as has been presented. >> >> Why? Because software costs a *lot* of money to make. And with zero >> marginal cost, the price is effectively the development cost divided >> by the size of the audience. >> >> GA is a pretty damn small audience. Why do you think you can buy a >> perfectly capable car GPS, with a database full of every road in the >> country, for under $200 but you'll spend ten times that much on >> something that's significantly less capable for your airplane? >> Certification and liability come into it, of course, but even >> ignoring those you would spen > d >> what seems to be an unreasonable amount of money. This is just >> because th > e >> development costs are fixed but the audience is microscopic. >> >> To keep costs down, you want something with low development costs, >> even i > f >> the material cost is significant. This mean proven designs, simple >> mechanical linkages, etc. And guess what, that's what we have. >> Software isn't going to save you any money unless you either find a >> way to make multipurpose software that the public can also use, >> increase the GA pilot population by an order of magnitude, or create >> a magical software-making machine that can cut your development costs >> by an order of magnitude. > > It is my belief that a software-controlled PAV, with the features > outlined by NASA/CAFE/PAV would allow an > > increase the GA population by an order of magnitude (at least) > > because the machine would be easier to fly, etc. > > This is what the FAA, NASA, CAFE, DARPA, and aero/astro departments > all over the United States and elsewhere would like to see, not just > me. :) > > -Le Chaud Lapin- Are you really that much of a moron to believe that the software will never fail and that only pilot experience, gained from actually flying an airplane, not sitting back and monitoring the software fly the airplane, have a chance of saving the day? You are a total a.shole. Go read about some of the software failures where the development cost of the software alone was more that the total gross sales of Cessna or Cirrus in any year. Tell us about the Malaysian 777 or the British Airways 777. How about the Airbus software failures. Or the software failure in the F22 Raptor when it first crossed the international date line! You just have your head up your a.s. Moron. Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system Per maggiori informazioni |For more info https://www.mixmaster.it Mr. Orwell, we resent your tone...posted below. If you have a shread of self respect, you will apologize to Mr. Lapin. It is reasonable to regard Mr. Lapin's idea with respect, as I do, because I've field worked the concepts he intends to employ and they are a mature technology. Good old fashion criticism of ideas is good, But please no more name calling. Ken > Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@gmail.com> wrote innews:803d4498-0f05-43aa-a881-dd7eda51ba32@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com: > [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] > Per maggiori informazioni |For more info > https://www.mixmaster.it > Mr. Orwell, we resent your tone...posted below. > If you have a shread of self respect, you will [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > > You are a total a.shole. > > You just have your head up your a.s. Moron. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system > > Per maggiori informazioni |For more info Thanks Ken! -Le Chaud Lapin- > Mr. Orwell, we resent your tone...posted below. > If you have a shread of self respect, you will [quoted text clipped - 86 lines] >> Per maggiori informazioni |For more info >> https://www.mixmaster.it You're a f.cking moron. Mr. Orwell hit the nail right on the head. You're to f.cking stupid to see it. Le Chaud Lapin <jaibuduvin@gmail.com> wrote in news:b55da2c4-87cc-44c2-8556-191fef5ef7df@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com: > I do, with the exception of the lift mechanism and the power source, > which, not suprisingly, influence the rest of the design of the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > -Le Chaud Lapin- You could run a long extension cord out of your penis. That solution makes more sense than anything you've said since entering this newsgroup, w.nker. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.