Hi,
I have this design for a controller but i dont know the program for it?
Where can I find the code for it? I tried google coding but cannot find it. I normally write Pascal(Delphi) but this needs to be in Keil C for a 8051.
I need to get it working quickly. Who will help?
BUT at least the ejector seat worked!
The interesting thing is that the plane crashed among the spectators of a large festival. There might have been 20 000 people really close by the location where the plane crashed. But there was this tiny little area (Stockholm has a lot of water, which affects peoples abilities to select where to stand) where no spectator was standing, so I think the worst injury was someone getting light burns since a military jet engine even without afterburner requires huge safety zones.
The fascinating thing is that SAAB managed to get both prototype crashes on TV. The first crash, they had invited a national news team after having a large number of uneventful tests. This crash was shown in the intro for all BBC news casts (together with the Challenger disaster) for at least six months.
The big problem then was the journalists. It did not help to show them statistics of prototype crashes with earlier generations of Swedish planes, or statistics about crashing american, russian, french, israeli planes or displaying budgets taking into plane losses into account. All the journalists could see was two-out-of-two failures and that was enough for professors to publically explain that it was technically impossible for the plane to fly because of the instability of the airframe (a specially designed feature since it also translates into very quick reactions - you don't have to fight to make the plane turn).
The problem is that all projects - civilian or military - gets more and more in an economical sqeeze. If something goes wrong, you don't need to be the guy who did wrong. Somehow, the reporters likes to sell a story. And that story require a company or a person to have done something wrong. And a company (or its owners) do not like to be blamed for having done something wrong, in which case they have to distribute the blame to an individual or a group. And a group don't like to be collectively blamed so in the end, the shareholders or the journalists will come hunting individuals.
In an earlier life, I did work with care alarm systems for elderly, where someone who have fallen or had an heart attack should be able to press a button to get help. Several times every year, the newspapers had articles about the alarms failing or being disconnected, resulting in someone dying without having received help. Everytime, there was huge amounts of speculation about the cause and if it should turn out to be "our" products. Maybe I was lucky, or maybe our products was better than the competitors, but in the end, it was always a competitor product, or maybe the people who installed the equipment decided to save money by turning off daily test alarms in which case an unplugged phone cable didn't get caught by the alarm receiver software.
I'm currently workign with solutions for infrastructure. Product failures means pitch black road crossings, water tower leaks not being reported, public transportation signs not showing the time of the next train/bus, people getting stuck in elevators not getting any response when pressing the alarm button, delayed police responses to robbed money transports, ...
Somehow, it is hard to work in the embedded world without being involved in critical systems where people may come to harm or get very irritated in case of problems. A software joke says that all programs contains at least one code line too much and at least one bug. So in the end, you will be able to reduce your program to a single line, and that line will be buggy.
One thing I have been wondering a bit about, is the huge number of people who post to this forum about "how do I implement xxx", but how few there are who posts: "how can I make sure that my code actually works?"
Maybe a very large number of posters are students or hobbyists. But a lot of posters do give me the impression of being professionals (as in payed), working on a commercial product. Do they already have a very good knowledge of QA (can anyone ever know too much?) or do they ask QA-related questions somewhere else? Or do they just do what they think is "enough", and leave the rest to the customers?
Per, Thanks for a long and catchy post. I have a few comments: The JAS 39 was not the first unstable airframe - the F-16 was the first operational fighter jet to have that property. Do you remember the F-20 peoject? see here: en.wikipedia.org/.../F-20_Tigershark
It also fell victim to multiple crashes and economic pressures that let to the cancellation of the entire program, 1.2 billion US dollars to late... By the way, I did not see an ejection in the first video or did it escape my eye?