Advertisement

Airplanes, redundancy and lunar habitats

  • Haym Benaroya
Chapter
Part of the Springer Praxis Books book series (PRAXIS)

Abstract

As engineers, we work under the assumptions that we can analyze and design anything with an acceptable level of reliability, given enough time and resources. We also extrapolate our design experiences into new domains, as much as possible, trying to learn lessons from successful designs and applying these to new, different, and perhaps more complex, projects. In many ways, we can learn from the technological evolution of airplanes. Over the past hundred years, airplanes have developed from simple wooden structures built by one or two people using standard materials, to becoming one of the most complex and successful – reliable – structures humans have conceived and built. Perhaps the most complex and successful, given that tens of thousands of people put themselves into these structures daily and survive. The airplane passenger is safer than the automobile passenger.

References

  1. 1.
    Committee on FAA Airworthiness Certification Procedures, National Research Council, 1980, Improving Aircraft Safety, 118 pages; Committee on FAA Airworthiness Certification Procedures, National Research Council, 1998, Improving the Continued Airworthiness of Civil Aircraft: A Strategy for the FAA’s Aircraft Certification Service, 86 pages.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Downer: On audits and airplanes: Redundancy and reliability-assessment in high technologies, Accounting, Organization and Society, Vol.36, 2011, pp.269–283.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Downer: When Failure is an Option: Redundancy, reliability and regulation in complex technical systems, Centre for Analysis of Risk and Regulation at the London School of Economics and Political Science, May 2009.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Downer: Anatomy of a Disaster: Why Some Accidents are Unavoidable, Centre for Analysis of Risk and Regulation at the London School of Economics and Political Science, March 2010.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    There are many lessons to learn from this accident review: The Nimrod Review: An independent review into the broader issues surrounding the loss of the RAF Nimrod MR2 Aircraft XV230 in Afghanistan in 2006, C. Haddon-Cave, October 28, 2009.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anti-Fragile: Things That Gain From Disorder, N.N. Taleb, Random House, 2012, 2016; See also: The Black Swan - The Impact of the Highly Improbable, N.N. Taleb, Random House 2007, 2016.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Downer: The Aviation Paradox: Why We Can ‘Know’ Jetliners But Not Reactors, Minerva (2017) 55, pp.229–248.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Haym Benaroya
    • 1
  1. 1.Professor of Mechanical & Aerospace EngineeringRutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA

Personalised recommendations