http://www2.startribune.com/stOnLine/cgi-bin/article?thisStory=81320879

Published Wednesday, January 26, 2000

Y2K bug detected at Metro Airport

Statewire

dtf-mhtcdetjbjdh2<

ROMULUS, Mich. (AP) -- A previously undetected Y2K problem has emerged in computers at Detroit Metropolitan Airport, the leader of a radar technicians union says.

The problem does not pose any dangers to travelers, and it does not affect flight operations, said Al Gardy, principal representative for Michigan and Wisconsin for the Professional Airways Systems Specialists Union. PASS represents about 160 radar technicians in the two states and about 11, 000 nationwide.

Gardy said Monday that technicians discovered the problem Friday at Metro when Federal Aviation Administration personnel tried to extract data about a recent incident in which two aircraft had flown close to each other.

The computer was unable to retrieve the stored data, Gardy said. And the date on the computer' s editing program read January 1970.

The problem affects only the retrieval of stored data. It has nothing to do with ongoing air traffic control operations.

Gardy said FAA officials told him the problem is national but that a software upgrade due to go in this week will correct it.

The problem might have arisen because of efforts to prevent Y2K problems.

" It did not occur until a Y2K patch was put in, " Gardy told the Detroit Free Press for a story Tuesday.

-- Homer Beanfang (Bats@inbellfry.com), January 26, 2000

Answers

The problem affects only the retrieval of stored data. It has nothing to do with ongoing air traffic control operations.

Unless, of course, two planes do collide. The FAA may want that data.

And then, of course, if two planes nearly collide. In which case, the FAA would say we really, really would like that data but if we can't access it downplay the affects on our investigation. We don't want anyone to think this Y2k stuff is more than hype.

Question left unresolved...

Why did those two planes come so close to each other?

Mike

==================================================================

-- Mike Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), January 26, 2000.

Problem did not occur until the patch was put in. Of course, the problem will be "resolved" with another patch!

>"<

-- Squirrel Hunter (nuts@upina.cellrelaytower), January 26, 2000.

Time to acquaint them with McCabe's Cyclomatic Complexity Index, perhaps.

Capers Jones, from "Applied Software Measurement": "Empirical studies reveal that programs with cyclomatic complexities of less than 5 are generally considered simple and easy to understand. Cyclomatic complexities of 10 or less are considered not too difficult. When the cyclomatic complexity is more than 20, the complexity is perceived as high. When the McCabe number exceeds 50, the software for practical purposes becomes untestable."

-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 26, 2000.

What BS; of course it is essential!

-- Hokie (Hokie_@hotmail.com), January 26, 2000.