Comments on: 100 years ago, they had the technology to…

By: TB

TB — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:12:37 +0000

A digression on this (not a rebuttal) over at “Flame.”

By: bowser

bowser — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:59:29 +0000

A little known but very interesting scientifical fack. The experience in the construction industry has been that for every so many minor but recordable accidents, there is a major accident. I believe the number is 1 in 14 or so.

The thinking is that the same mental lapses lead to all accidents, it’s just that about 1 in 14 are in a worse circumstance.

By: ER

ER — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:32:02 +0000

That goes without saying. I’m always reminded of the .45 ACP SemiAuto Pistol, the “Government Model”. It just celebrated its 100th birthday, and many firearms enthusiasts still consider it the best all-around handgun ever made.

There are many weapons today that do some things better, that are superior to it in some aspect, but in overall use, utility, economics, effectiveness, ease of operation, durability, reliability, practicality, safety, simplicity of manufacture and maintenance, ergonomics and training, it is still in everybody’s Top Ten.

It is extremely simple, in both construction and use, but it has just enough additional complexity to make it better. The perfect blend of versatility and robustness.

It’s no one single thing, its the entire gestalt, the whole package. Its a bundle of compromises that all fit in harmonious balance. Not bad for century old tech.

By: TB

TB — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:07:03 +0000

A really good engineer will come up with a simpler way that does the job better.

KISS should always be kept in mind.

By: ER

ER — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:50:13 +0000

The natural engineering response to a problem is to build in a fix. But the more fixes you add, as you point out, the more complex things get, and the complex things get, the more likely things will go wrong, if not by an outright failure, then by confusion of the operator.

In any system, the optimum level of complexity is the one that is least likely to fail, not the one that can handle the most problems.

During the Vietnam war, fighter- bomber pilots were provided with so many defensive systems, alarms, warnings, indicators, sensors, “options” and other gadgets that studies showed the most successful pilots simply turned them all off and flew “by the seat of their pants”.

It’s not that these systems didn’t work, they were actually quite effective. It was just that it complicated the pilot’s decision-making process, confused him, and in times of stress he often misinterpreted signals or made mistakes. To a certain extent this can be overcome by training, but there is a law of diminishing returns.

Everyone knows about KISS, or to use the sailor’s version: “If you haven’t got one aboard, it can’t break when you most need it.”

By: bowser

bowser — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:29:51 +0000

The more complex things get the more chance of an incident. Safety systems simply count toward complexity.

The accident to which ER refers involved two fully loaded 747s. There’s a streaming NOVA program which re-enacts the entire thing, showing string of errors which led to the collision. Oddly enough, the Chief Pilot of KLM was the prime culprit.

By: ER

ER — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 13:30:49 +0000

It wasn’t all that long ago that two jumbo jets collided on an airport runway and burst into flame. The potential for triple digit casualty accidents has been here for a long time. When you factor in war and terrorism, it gets much worse. It is now possible to send a nuclear powered aircraft carrier, 80 aircraft and 5000 crew to the botton using only one conventional explosive.

At the Battle of Midway in 1942, the Japanese lost 4 carriers in an afternoon.