the plan had two identical waypoint
But several thousand miles apart, which seemed to be issue.
Safety critical system sees a problem and shuts down to keep everyone safe. It seemed to work from that point of view.
Far better we find the fault by inconveniencing people for 2-3 days rather than by scraping 300 off a mountainside.
So why didnt it just reject the flight plan, they must have some sort of validation that checks the flight plan is correct and makes sense. It seems odd to have a system that accepts flight plans from outside organisations but that doesn't then check the plans to make sure they can be accepted. Is that not just the work of a basic interface? Also seems very odd that the result is a predetermined instructions to shut the whole flight system down and not just flag that one flight plan. There is definitely more to this issue and its not the rogue flight plan but the way that it is imported and the checks that are in place.
When it was reported that there was bad data in the flight plan you’d think it was corrupt or something to cause the system to crash, but no the plan had two identical waypoints (or identically named) which brought everything to a standstill.
There is definitely more to this issue and its not the rogue flight plan but the way that it is imported and the checks that are in place.
Hard to say really... It could be that simple... Ive seen websites in development that use an elastic search function, but the search box was free text, and a 'wrong' type of input could crash the database...
And erroneous input *should* just have that one particular instruction rejected, but if things are done on the cheap then it can happen.
I can't stop thinking that a pesky planner thought "what would happen if I submitted a crazy flight plan that went from WYPNT to WYPNT via MOTWN?"
