gordon@hymir.cs.cornell.edu (Jeffrey Adam Gordon) (01/19/90)
This morning I briefly heard that a "communication" to the shuttle caused it to start spinning somehow. Any more details? - jag -
spudcrl@wpi.wpi.edu (A man and his sword) (01/19/90)
In article <36192@cornell.UUCP> gordon@cs.cornell.edu (Jeffrey Adam Gordon) writes: >This morning I briefly heard that a "communication" to the shuttle >caused it to start spinning somehow. Any more details? > >- jag - Yes. The pilot was reaching for the radio, and hit the "yoke" with his arm. 8) (kidding, btw.) --Curt ******************************************************************************* * spudcrl@wpi.wpi.edu * on IRC * This space * * Curt R Lindmark * Defender * intentionally * * Born to be strange * A man and his sword * left blank * *******************************************************************************
stealth@caen.engin.umich.edu (Mike Peltier) (01/29/90)
In article <19500002@hpfipgt.HP.COM> pgt@hpfipgt.HP.COM (Paul Tobin) writes: > > Standard >procedure is for the shuttle to echo the received data back down for >comparison with the original data. This was done, but the HUMAN >operator failed to note the mismatch! Somebody was asleep at the >wheel. Why was a human relied upon to determine whether or not the data matches? That seems sorta silly, when you can just do something similar to "cat echoed_data | diff - real_data | wc -l" and test that against zero. If it's not, simply retransmit. I don't see any need for a human in that loop. -- - - - - - - - - - Michael V. Peltier | Computer Aided Engineering Network 1420 King George Blvd. | University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Ann Arbor, MI 48104-6924 | stealth@caen.engin.umich.edu
lwall@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Larry Wall) (02/02/90)
In article <48518e97.1766d@june.engin.umich.edu> stealth@caen.engin.umich.edu (Mike Peltier) writes: : In article <19500002@hpfipgt.HP.COM> pgt@hpfipgt.HP.COM (Paul Tobin) writes: : > : > Standard : >procedure is for the shuttle to echo the received data back down for : >comparison with the original data. This was done, but the HUMAN : >operator failed to note the mismatch! Somebody was asleep at the : >wheel. : : Why was a human relied upon to determine whether or not the data : matches? That seems sorta silly, when you can just do something : similar to "cat echoed_data | diff - real_data | wc -l" and test : that against zero. If it's not, simply retransmit. I don't see any : need for a human in that loop. Then some wise guy says "ls -l *_data" and discovers that neither file has been modified in the last 11 months... Or that echoed_data and real_data are hard links to the same file... Larry Wall lwall@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov