[LEAPSECS] Leap Sec vs Y2K

Poul-Henning Kamp phk at phk.freebsd.dk
Sun Dec 12 04:31:35 EST 2010

In message <730779E5-5E6B-4016-9BE3-BACD9BB4A4AD at noao.edu>, Rob Seaman writes:

>On Dec 11, 2010, at 6:36 PM, Warner Losh wrote:


>> ATC systems being unsynchronized means that planes crash; clearly a situation we want to avoid.


>Presumably they do have layers on layers of error handling built


They do.

But all of those layers are based on reducing traffic density if
need be to VFR/CAT-zero where you can only fly if you can visually
see that you do not get in trouble.

Most major airports would see their throughput reduced to less than
10%, provided they have parallel runways, if not, it will be less
than 5%.

> as well as contingent procedures - perhaps even traditional

>sextant navigation relying on access to a timescale that approximates

>Greenwich Mean Time :-)

No, the windows of modern cockpits are not big enough to allow
rutine use of a sextant. The windows have minimal upward view these
days, to give better radiation protection for the crew.

Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

More information about the LEAPSECS mailing list