Top
Best
New

Posted by jakey_bakey 10/24/2024

Boeing 787s must be reset every 51 days or 'misleading data' is shown (2020)(www.theregister.com)
205 points | 223 commentspage 3
tessierashpool9 10/25/2024|
easy:

  while(true) {
    if(
      (date.today() - date(this.system.uptime) >= 51)
        && !this.sys.isFlying
    ) {
      this.sys.resetNow();
    }
    time.sleep(1000);
  }
boohoo123 10/25/2024|
well now your system doesn't do anything because its stuck in a forever loop checking the time. it's most likely programmed in C so you can remove the OOP as well.
jcelerier 10/24/2024||
51 days * 86400 seconds * 1000

=> 4406400000

2^32

=> 4294967296

the coincidence seems unlikely, it's basically ~~5 hours and a half~~ 30 hours of difference if one has a 1-ms counter increment

sitkack 10/24/2024||
Watch Windows 95 crash live as it exceeds 49.7 days uptime https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28340101

Must be a northwest washington thing.

Dylan16807 10/24/2024|||
It's a day and a half difference, and since 2^32 is the smaller number that would be pretty catastrophic. Pretty likely it's coincidence.
thamer 10/24/2024|||
Where did you get 5 hours and a half? It seems to be closer to 31 hours:

    >>> round((4406400000 - 2**32)/(1000 * 3600), 3)
    30.954
jcelerier 10/24/2024||
from me typing too quickly in bc, apparently :')
throwbadubadu 10/24/2024||
Not getting it.. yeah the famous 32 bit ms overflow after 49 something days. But why then 51 here? Shouldn't they be required to reboot after 49 days please please? :D
tines 10/24/2024|||
Possibly cumulative error in the timing source?
hinkley 10/24/2024|||
It's possible to run tasks instead of starting every second, starting one second after the previous iteration finishes.

So if you have something that checks the system health every millisecond, and keeps a count instead of a duration, then if it takes a couple microseconds to complete you might get something less than 86 million ticks per day instead of 86.4 million.

Jtsummers 10/24/2024|||
The OS used on the 787 has a hard real-time scheduler. Tasks are started up at a specific frequency (set per task), run to completion or to the end of their time slot (set per task) and terminated. We had, IIRC, a strict 100ms slot for our bit of LRU software to do everything and it would be launched every 1s (from memory, that was 15 years ago). Information could be stored between executions so partial completion is something you could handle if needed by storing state information and using it at the start of the next iteration (we didn't need that, our tasks finished in the slot).

You don't base the start of a future task on the end of the prior one, you base it on a fixed clock for these kinds of systems.

tedunangst 10/24/2024|||
Or maybe it's aliens and their strontium-89 wormhole collapses after 51 days. At this point we're just making shit up.
jcelerier 10/24/2024||||
Or just ticking every 1.025 ms (e.g. at 975 Hz instead of 1khz)... that brings us to :

    (4406400000 - 1.025*2 ^ 32)/1000 
so a difference of 1.12 hours with the "51 days" mention.
icelancer 10/24/2024|||
This is even scarier than the base concern.
amelius 10/24/2024|||
Maybe it takes 2 days to boot the entire thing?
dgoldstein0 10/25/2024||
This should carry a label: 2020. This article is 4.5 years old
dang 10/25/2024|
Added. Thanks!
boohoo123 10/24/2024||
this is what happens when you hire based on checked checkboxes and not qualifications.
xyst 10/24/2024|
This company just can’t stay out of the news. Their planes are trash. Software is straight garbage. Many people have died because of this company and suffered undue stress/anxiety because of the massive dip in quality.

Boeing engineers/builders caught on audio stating they wouldn’t be caught dead in their own planes unless feeling suicidal.

zamadatix 10/25/2024|
The company definitely can't stay out of the news and it's gone downhill over the recent years but you've picked an interesting post to lament about those on. The news they can't stay out of is over 4 years old in this case. The model of plane it's about (787) has never had a single fatality despite >15 years of operations and >1,000 units operating today. In all, deaths are probably the worst possible metric to berate Boeing on - including every death (e.g. hijackings, not just engineering failures) their popular 747 line has had comes to <6,000 fatalities despite carrying billions of passengers over a period of >50 years.

Despite their ever increasing incompetence on delivery speed, test compliance, and innovation... commercial air travel with Boeing (and other major air manufacturers) has always been one of, if not the, safest mechanisms of travel we've ever executed on. Particularly the last 5 years have been the safest period in terms of air travel deaths or injuries.

None of that means we shouldn't criticize Boeing by any means, just that doing it over perceived death and accident counts because of what news headlines imply is complete nonsense in terms of actual numbers no matter how you slice it. It's important those kinds of things are reported but it's equally important to not get swept up in paranoia over it.

gs17 10/25/2024||
Agreed, my 737 fears were relieved by researching how many of them are in the air at any moment, how many millions of trips they fly each year, how old airframes can get before they get retired, etc. Even the "worse" models are feats of engineering.