|
| | | | Post in reply to: John
Since I know from our previous discussions that you are a little slow,
I'll say it again, a little slower this time....
"I don't see anywhere in this article where they say what OSs they are
using."
Steve
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Canuck57
Clustering doesn't help with application software faults.
Its a common mistake people make, like thinking RAID is a substitute for
backups.
Any application software failing during combat could be a problem.
That is why they like mature software on military systems.
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: dennis@home
Erm, doesn't the military have operating systems that are top secret? If
they use windows or any of the other large operating systems it's for normal
stuff like record keeping and files. They don't guide satellites or missiles
with it or navigate ships.
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Moshe Goldfarb
In article <9t96hqagi7vh.172qilsj253n$.dlg@40tude.net>,
I guess it is all a matter of when you grew up. My youth was filled with
those little metric shows on PBS that were basically 30 min PSAs. I still
remember that a meter is just a little longer than a yard, a dime is about
1 mm in thickness, and that a cubic decimeter = 1 liter = 1 kilogram which
is around 2.2 pounds. I also remember the old pint is a pound (ie 16
ounces) of the common system as well.
Strange thing is that the University of Utah taught ALL its physics courses
in metric in the mid 1980's. I guess I thought that is the way all
universities of that time taught their courses.
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Steve de Mena
There are a number of different operating systems in use at the US-armed
forces including Linux and microsoft. The recent years DARPA has
financed quite many Linux based projects, of course those projects
usually aren't for desktop use, and of course it's cheaper to blow up a
computer with Linux than one with microsoft, as you may loose the
license when you no longer have the original hardware left, otherwise
those missiles would need to eject the on board "computer" and the NAVY
SEALS has to do "rescue" missions to retrieve those machines 
--
//Aho
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Bruce Grubb
They taught both systems when I was in engineering school in the late 70's
but the MKS system was used for the courses and the English system was just
taught to illustrate the differences.
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Bruce Grubb
Well US standards ARE based on the metric system
http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/
And this is from Wikipedia
The use of two different systems was the root cause in the loss of the
Mars Climate Orbiter in 1998. NASA specified metric units in the
contract. NASA and other organizations worked in metric units but one
subcontractor, Lockheed Martin, provided thruster performance data to
the team in pound force seconds instead of newton seconds. The
spacecraft was intended to orbit Mars at about 150 kilometers (93 mi)
altitude, but the incorrect data meant that it probably descended
instead to about 57 kilometers (35 mi), burning up in the Martian
atmosphere.
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Moshe Goldfarb
Anyone in engineering and science had better know MKS. Not 100% sure of
this, but is not the US the last market on earth using metric? Even the
British sell gas by the litre.
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Canuck57
I was fortunate because before high school I learned the British system
(240 pennies in the GBP etc, yards feet and inches) but when I got to
high school they switched to Metric, so using both comes naturally to me.
In the 80s I worked for a US corporation and though we made all kinds of
fasteners (Nuts and bolts) and sold huge quantities of Metric ones all
over Europe the drawing office had to submit things to the US corporate
who insisted on all measurements being in "English" units. There is some
logic to this, high precision gauges are often very costly, so to draw
and measure in the one standard avoids a lot of expense.
So I guess I have stayed in practice with both.
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: dennis@home
But this is my point. But maybe not clear.
Why use a complex, hard to review and less stable OS than say pSOS or
vxWorks or even a skinny down version of RTOS like Linux? Why use a complex
high maintenance insecure OS like NT? Seems kind of stupid as simplicity
also has value in reliably, real time response and maintenance. If for
nothing else, less to go wrong.
The need and use of hard drives also bothers me. Get a minor hit vibrating
through the hull and the heads crash...
Agree with clustering, that is primarily for hardware faults. But it would
be nice to know a war ship with nukes has more than one frail way of command
and control.
Hey Scotty, come up and replace this NT DLL or hard drive so we can launch
these damn things...whew...scary thought with a SU 30 or SU 47 coming at
you.
|
| |
| |
|