[FedCom] Interoperability Hamppers Agencies

[lists]

Aircraft use redundancy. In a trunking system, show me the redundancy. 
Lie is a bit strong of a word here. I'm not a liar.


Michael Rumberg wrote:
> in theory this should be true.  but it depends on the thought and engineering behind the system that puts the lie to this:  not much out there is as complicated as modern jet aircraft.  and they dont crash at 35% rates.....  taken even more to the extreme is the space shuttle and spacefligght/satellite operations.  two out of 100+ plus flights is pretty damn good reliability record.
> 
> point being--better planning by better people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>From: lists <lists at lazygranch.com>
>>Date: Sun Oct 16 17:49:23 CDT 2005
>>To: Discussion of Federal Government Communications <fedcom at mailman.qth.net>
>>Subject: Re: [FedCom] Interoperability Hamppers Agencies
> 
> 
>>The more complicated the system, the more likely it is to fail.
>>
>>The argument goes that if each piece of the system is X  reliable and 
>>you have N items in the chain, your reliability is X^N. Ninety percent 
>>reliability and 2 items in the chain would  be 81% reliable. Make that 
>>10 items in the chain and you are down to 35%.
>>
>>Trunking by definition can't be more reliable than a non-trunked system.
>>