Datesfat Chicks wrote:
> I think it has more to do with the modes of failure than with the
> failure rate.

The specific modes don't matter. What matters - the ONLY thing
that matters in this sort of discussion - is whether or not the
failure in question is survivable, and the likelihood of the failure.

>
> If you have a cable and bellcrank system, certainly even with proper
> inspection you're going to have things go wrong. Agreed.
>

And those "things that go wrong" can kill you, just as dead as
if the failure had been due to software inverting the plane or
whatever.

The bottom line is always going to be: I get on the plane, I have
a 1 in N chance of not surviving the trip. N is presumably a fairly
large number for ANY sort of control system which has been
accepted for use in manned aircraft - or any other sort of vehicle
- but if it's 1 in 10,000 for a mechanical system, and 1 in 100,000
for whatever alternative I'm offered (whether that alternative is as
easy for *me* to understand or not), the choice is pretty clear.

Bob M.