Xref: utzoo sci.space:15151 sci.space.shuttle:3957 sci.astro:5607
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!nisca.ircc.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!usc!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news
From: stevo@uniblab.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Steve Groom)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,sci.astro
Subject: Re: Computer
Message-ID: <1989Oct31.173058.15920@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: 31 Oct 89 17:30:58 GMT
References: <1368@orbit.UUCP>
Reply-To: stevo@elroy.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Steve Groom)
Organization: Image Analysis Systems Grp, JPL
Lines: 17

In article <1368@orbit.UUCP> schaper@pnet51.orb.mn.org (S Schaper) writes:
[ referring to the future use of "modern" processors for flight hardware,
in particular a version of the 8086 ]
>I'd opt for 80860's that are rad-hardened, or 88k's in parallel...

Of course you would.  Believe me, the people responsible for flight
software would too.  The problem is that it's not a trivial task to
design and produce rad-hard parts.  You don't just whip up a special
version of a chip in a few months and stick it in a spacecraft.  That's
why a rad-hard version of the 8086 is just now being discussed for use,
because has taken this long to produce it.

Personally, I'd rather see them using a SPARC :-)

--
Steve Groom, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
stevo@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov  {ames,usc}!elroy!stevo