Last time...
Last time I read something like this, the twits had entered a whole load of timing data thinking the format as hh:mm, when it was actually mm:ss. Hence a display 60X faster than expected. Seems about the same speedup as this incident.
Computer error triggers mass rocket launch
Americans love their fireworks on Independence Day, but it is possible to have too much of a good thing. That's what spectators got on July 4 in San Diego, California, when an errant computer triggered every rocket in the city's annual display to launch at once. The pyrotechnics were meant to last 18 minutes. Instead, the …
-
-
Thursday 5th July 2012 20:25 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Last time...
Timing for these is usually hh:mm:ss:ff, driven by SMPTE LTC timecode from the audio source.
However, even if everything is correct in the pyro sequencer, if somebody hits "fast forward" on the timecode generator while the system is armed...
Anon because by the grace of God go I. Big public building openings? Oh yeah. Not nervous. At all. Everything's ready, it'll go fine.
-
-
Sunday 8th July 2012 15:51 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Last time...
I heard from a friend of a friend of a mate of the guy who worked at the Oban event.
It was not an HH:mm against mm:ss confusion as that would have been extremely obvious. It was a mm:ss against ss:ff mixup.
This is also one of the reasons why most timecoded pyro operators want at least 20 seconds of good timecode before the first 'fire' to give them some time for an "Ohshit" moment and pull the key!
Anon to protect the red faces.
-
-
-
Thursday 5th July 2012 19:34 GMT James O'Brien
????
Some sort of computer virus caused this? I smell bullshit from someone who needed something to blame besides their own incompetence. My guess is they probably had the display to set based off the computer clock and the clock was set wrong instead of using a good old fashioned timer. And even if they were using a timer script they probably dropped a couple 00's.
-
-
Thursday 5th July 2012 19:53 GMT ElReg!comments!Pierre
Yes, probably
"must be a virus" is the modern age equivalent of "the dog ate it". get it for all kind of things, from data deletion to forgotten passwords.
Last time it was for the inability to select the right printer queue. Apparently a "virus" (of which no trace could be found upon inspection) caused the change of the default printer queue hence much whining about the network being broken. I know it's bollocks, they know I know it's bollocks, but they keep trying. It has become a social convention, a bit like "how do you do" and "have a nice day". Meaningless converstation lubricant.
"we have a virus" actually means "can you come and show me how to find my own arse with the help of a map, a compass and a lighthouse. Again."
-
-
-
-
Friday 6th July 2012 05:43 GMT bazza
Re: Repeat after me
Forget computers, it's photocopiers that I don't get on with. It wasn't so bad ten years ago, pressing the wrong button would waste only a few hundred sides of paper. Now the damn things are so fast they spit out thousands and thousands of wasted sheets in the blink of an eye, all neatly collated and stapled.
-
-
-
Thursday 5th July 2012 21:07 GMT Stevie
Bah!
Everyone is being a bit harsh - clearly the "spokesman" was on the spot and not terribly computer literate, using "virus" for "glitch" from the phrasing there.
Coordinator at the optimum viewing point with a radio and human beings with manual ignition systems in the barges is the way to go, because if Mr Boss goes off-plan and says "everyone light everything at once" the bargees will say "No".
Just because you can put a computer into your event doesn't mean you should.
-
Thursday 5th July 2012 21:42 GMT ElReg!comments!Pierre
Re: Bah!
"Coordinator at the optimum viewing point with a radio and human beings with manual ignition systems in the barges is the way to go, because if Mr Boss goes off-plan and says "everyone light everything at once" the bargees will say "No"."
If I remember correctly they make damn sure that no soul remains aboard the barges at the time of firing. They even triple-check. Too dangerous.
Plus, big modern fireworks are very precisely timed ballets, often needing the firing of a dozen devices situated on separate barges at the exact same time, for example. The time between firings is also extremely precisely controlled to ensure that a rocket blooms in the exact center of the aftermath of the previous one for example. Humans just can't react that fast/precisely, especially not over a walkie connection. The way it used to be done was by using very precisely calibrated fuses but that's more much prone to errors and mishaps than a computer and electrical ignition.
Modern fireworks are actually an almost perfect use case for a computer.
-
Friday 6th July 2012 16:40 GMT Stevie
Re: Bah!
"Plus, big modern fireworks are very precisely timed ballets, often needing the firing of a dozen devices situated on separate barges at the exact same time, for example. The time between firings is also extremely precisely controlled to ensure that a rocket blooms in the exact center of the aftermath of the previous one for example."
Makes you wonder how they ever managed to pull the trick off for the three hundred years or so before computers were ready to take up the slack.
Or not, as in the case of the San Diego Fireball of Unentertainment.
I imagine you'll be telling me next why the pyramids require the intervention of UFOs to get built.
-
-
-
-
Friday 6th July 2012 07:50 GMT auburnman
Not us, guv'nor
Us? We like a good fireworks display as much as anyone else. We also like to laugh at someone else'e ballsup a little more than we should probably admit, but it's not as much fun if you deliberately cause them to eff up.
On the subject of the "must be a virus" guy, I have a fair bit of sympathy for him as he suddenly became the centrepiece for a highly public SNAFU on a major holiday event. If it happened to me I'd be probably dropping all the FUD and chaff in my verbal arsenal to buy time for a retreat and regroup.
-
-
-
Thursday 5th July 2012 22:40 GMT PyroMoth
RE: Bah!
I will assume you have never stood in close proximity to a large scale show, or had to fire a show manually to rapid cues.
Just like the world of lighting, computerised firing controllers are ubiquitous. They are far safer and can give much more accurate choreography. Thousands of shows are run in the same way each year without issue.
I'm pretty sure someone just made a mistake under pressure on the busiest day of the year, and the script got messed up as a result. It will have happened to most companies one way or another. No point lying.
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
-
Thursday 5th July 2012 22:40 GMT Phil Koenig
Advanced WiFi control system
How much you want to bet the person who designed the control system used a $39 WiFi hotspot with encryption turned-off? Maybe it was the same intellectual that designed the retail point-of-sale system for TJX in the States...
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/10/tjx_hack_blamed.html
-
Friday 6th July 2012 19:41 GMT Richard 12
Re: Advanced WiFi control system
Nobody even considers using WiFi for this.
This kind of event needs around 10ms accuracy, and WiFi cannot possibly do that as its latency varies wildly.
WiFi is great for email and surfing the web, it's ok for buffered video but it's utterly useless for anything that needs even mildly accurate timing.
-
Friday 6th July 2012 23:43 GMT ElReg!comments!Pierre
Re: Advanced WiFi control system
> Nobody even considers using WiFi for this.
What you meant was "Nobody _with actual knowledgẹ_ even considers using WiFi for that."
Stevie up there seriously suggested using fleshlings on the barges with manual ignition systems, walkie-takies and a central coordinator. The latency of that being in the seconds range obviously (for road safety purposes the reaction time of a human is estimated to be roughly one second; add the "stellar" clarity of radio communication to that...)
-
-
-
-
Friday 6th July 2012 09:38 GMT I ain't Spartacus
Re: Not entirely a bad thing
Excuse me, but why are the two mutually exclusive?
If the bar's not serving, then that's what the Good Lord invented the hip flask for. Admittedly the fireworks displays I've been to in England tend to be New Year and November. So a warming nip of whisky doesn't go amiss.
-
-
Friday 6th July 2012 02:08 GMT amanfromMars 1
Cogitant ergo sunt .. and an APT rallying call in these changed days of strange ways and memes?
Neil, Hi,
A word of advice, which you can if you want to, classify as insider information and a hot tip ..... don't put any money you cannot afford to lose, nor any shirt which you want to keep, on a bet that would support the article's sub-headline ....... Rise of the machines thwarted ... for now
Any latin scholars [are you an El Reg reader, Boris J?] out there who can supply the correct translation into Latin of ..... "They think therefore they are" , which of course is a play on that well known classic line ..... Cogito ergo sum.
-
Friday 6th July 2012 10:53 GMT Sceptic Tank
Visible from the moon?
The party was great! We had a blast!
But, yes, it's sad when reading a report about a fireworks display takes longer than the display itself....
Maybe the pyrotechnics guy upgraded his old Microsloth Windoze operating system to something a bit zippier just prior to the show and the program ran in a fraction of the time it did before. That's probably why the chap though he had a virus and observed program glitches before too.
Or something...
-
Friday 6th July 2012 13:04 GMT LordHighFixer
Most likely
The display had a test phase that is supposed to run before the show starts. You know, something that tests the firing control circuits right before the show that is supposed to run, with the "fire" switch in the off position. Then after the initial test and announcement the switch is switched to the "on" position for the show.
I can imagine the control operator starting the program, like he or she has done a dozen times before, looking over and seeing the switch in the "fire" position. Trying to jump for it and having an "oh crap" moment as he hears the first detonation.
Honest, it was a hardware glitch....kinda...
-
Friday 6th July 2012 15:08 GMT Alan Esworthy
"Glitch". Ugh.
"Although the company has yet to determine the exact nature of the glitch that caused..."
It's bad enough when non-techies use the term "glitch" but when a Reg writer use the term I cringe. A "glitch" has the same sense as "just one of those things" or "these things happen" implying that no one was responsible, if not outright inevitability.
This wasn't a "glitch". It was an "error". Somebody screwed up: designer, coder, packager, installer, tester, wire crew, user, SOMEbody.
-
Friday 6th July 2012 15:44 GMT Zedsquared
Good to see the Reg upholding the tradition
of the media calling all big display fireworks "Rockets" ... They're "Shells" goddammit! Nobody uses rockets any more on a big public display, too much worry about where the sticks end up.
... Mine's the anorak with the bits of igniter wire in the pocket and burn holes patched with gaffer tape.
-
Friday 6th July 2012 16:16 GMT The Grump
The Boss had to do a last minute inspection...
although the BFOFH (Bastard Fireworks Operator From Hell) told him everything was programmed correctly. When the Boss was checking the timing interface, he said to himself "This can't be right", and "corrected" the timing.
Now the Boss has to determine who's fault it was (obviously not his own fault). It won't be pretty at Mission Control, especially when the CEO gets the company stock reports. I would love to see how the BFOFH would cover his arse by implicating a beancounter from accounting, who was looking into "unnecessary expenses" at Mission Control.
Beer, because they'll need a lot of it after this disaster.
-
-
Saturday 7th July 2012 00:13 GMT ElReg!comments!Pierre
Re: Reminds me
> Reminds me of heterosexual sex before I became a lesbian
I feel sorry for your poor experiences but I seriously hope tha was not your only motivation for switching teams.
As a heterosexual male I have experienced _plenty_ of really crappy and insatisfactory (for me) heterosexual intercourse. Bad sex usually has nothing to do with the relative genders of those involved. It's usually simply down to either lack of experience ("what am I supposed to do with that?"), selfishness ("oh yeah baby that's good! Good night now. *SNORE*") or lack of involvment ("Sorry hun I REALLY have to answer that."). There are other reasons but if you look closely they often boil down to one of these 3.
Not that there is anything wrong with being a lesbian. As a heterosexual male I've always understood lesbians better than heterosexual women. What's not to like in a female body?
But all this would probably be best discussed in another place. This article was about dry things that go boom.
> (sorry, here come the down votes)
Why the fuck would you think that? I was tempted to downvote you just for that remark, then I remembered that some people care about votes for some unfathomable reasons so downvoting might be considered rude.
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
