Ross McLean wrote:
A FLARM is not going to solve ALL your collision risk, that is the job of
the pilot. Open your eyes, look outside and turn your head a lot.
Gee, Ross, thanks for the freakin' news flash. I'd never have guessed
such a non-obvious conclusion if it wasn't for your superior insight.
You've certainly enriched my life. I'll make it my mission to ensure
that your comment doesn't win any awards for "Most Useless Contribution
To An Email Discussion In 2006."
Ahem.
The point I was getting at is that defects in user interface design can
help to *CAUSE* accidents. History is replete with damage and fatalities
occurring shortly after warning systems have spontaneously removed notice
of a threat from the operator without warning.
It was only yesterday that we were talking about the RISKS forum,
where accounts of precisely that type of failure mode crop up year after
year after year. It's one of the ancient and time-tested ways humanity
has of killing themselves, because we don't seem to learn any lessons
from it and we keep repeating the same mistakes.
My question was aimed at discovering whether Nigel, who has just
produced a user interface where threats can disappear without warning
if a more important threat appears, has formulated any of those lessons
into his system.
(and I'm not criticizing, Nigel; Merely enquiring)
- mark
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I tried an internal modem, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
but it hurt when I walked. Mark Newton
----- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 ------------- Fax: +61-8-82231777 -----
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
