It is perhaps inevitable that a major new and complex product like a passenger aircraft will experience a few problems during its development. But the history of the Airbus A380 was a long and incident packed journey from drawing board to reality that illustrates the dangers when the design activity goes wrong. This is the story in brief. 1991 – Airbus consults with international airlines about their requirements for a super-large passenger aircraft.
Airbus rival Boeing says it has begun studies into ‘very large’ commercial aircraft. June 1993- Boeing decides not to go for a super-large passenger aircraft, but instead to focus on designing smaller ‘jumbos’. Airbus and its partners set up the A3XX team to start the ‘super jumbo’ project. 1996 – Airbus forms its ‘Large Aircraft’ Division. Because of the size of the aircraft, it is decided to develop specially designed engines rather than adapt existing models. 2000- The commercial launch of the A3XX (later to be named the A380) 2002- starts on manufacturing the aircraft’s key components.
This causes turmoil in the boardrooms of both Airbus and its parent company EADS. The company’s directors are accused of suppressing the news for months before revealing it to shareholders. It leads to the resignations of Gustav Humbert, Airbus’ Chief executive, Noel Forgeard, EADS co-chief executive, and Charles Campion, the A380 programme manager. October 2006- Airbus infuriates customers by announcing yet a further delay for the A380, this time of a whole year. The first plane is now forecast to enter commercial service around twenty months later than had been originally planned.
The delays will cost Airbus another estimated ? 4. 8 billion over the next four years. The company announces a drastic cost-cutting plan to try to recoup some of the losses. The Power8 programme is intended to ‘reduce costs, save cash and develop new products faster’. It wants to increase productivity by 20% and reduce overheads by 30%. October 2007- The supper-jumbo eventually takes off in full service as a commercial airliner for Singapore Airlines. It wins rave reviews from both airlines and passengers – even if it is two years late.
So what caused the delays? First, the A380 was the most complex passenger jet ever to be built. Second, the company was notorious for its internal rivalries, its constant need to balance work between its French and German plants so that neither country had too obvious an advantage, constant political infighting, particularly by the French and German governments and frequent changes of management. According to one insider, the ‘underlying reason for the mess we were in was the hopeless lack of integration [between the French and German sides] within the company’.
Even before the problems became evident to outsiders, critics of Airbus claimed that its fragmented structure was highly inefficient and prevented it from competing effectively. Eventually it was this lack of integration between design and manufacturing processes that was the main reason for the delays to the aircraft’s launch. During the early design stages the firm’s French and German factories had used incompatible software to design the 500 km of wiring that each plane needs. Eventually, to resolve the cabling problems, the company had to transfer two thousand German staff from Hamburg to Toulouse.
Processes that should have been streamlined had to be replaced by temporary and less efficient ones, described by one French union official as a ‘doit-yourself system’ Feelings ran high on the shop floor, with tension and arguments between the French and German staff. ‘The German staff will first have to succeed at doing the work they should have done in Germany’, said the same official. Electricians had to resolve the complex wiring problems, with the engineers having to adjust the computer blueprints as they modified them so they could be used on future aircraft. Normal installation time is two to three weeks’ said Sabine Klauke, a team leader. ‘This way it taking us four months. ’ Mario Heinen, who ran the cabin and fuselage cross-border division, admitted the pressure to keep up with intense production schedules and the overcrowded conditions made things difficult.
‘We have been working on these initial aircraft in a handmade way. It is not a perfectly organised industrial process. ’ But, he claimed, there was no choice. ‘We have delivered five high-quality aircraft this way. If we had left the work in Hamburg, to wait for a new wiring design, we would not have delivered one by now. But the toll taken by these delays was high. The improvised wiring processes were far more expensive than the planned ‘streamlined’ processes and the delay in launching the aircraft meant two years without the revenue that the company had expected.
But the Airbus was not alone. Its great rival, Boeing, was still having problems. Engineers’ strikes, supply chain problems and mistakes by its own design engineers had further delayed its ‘787 Dreamliner’ aircraft. Specifically, fasteners used to attach the titanium floor grid, to the composite ‘barrel’ of the fuselage had been wrongly located, resulting in 8,000 fasteners having to be replaced.
Digital Forensics in the Criminal Justice System
Digital Forensics in the Criminal Justice System.
WEEK #3 In weeks 1-3, you have learned what digital evidence is, not in the physical sense but in the legal sense, and then what steps you should take to identify and collect it. To summarize the evidentiary information from the readings, there are four basic classifications of evidence that can be applied to items of potential investigative value: Testimonial Evidence – Testimony or a statement provided by an individual detailing what they observed or experienced (through any of their senses). For example, a witness may have heard tires screech and a loud crash but not actually have seen the accident. In this example, even though he didn’t actually see the crash, witness’s testimony is still valuable – it can help pinpoint the time of a crash, determine the number of vehicles involved, or speak to the lighting conditions or weather conditions were at the time of the accident. Testimonial evidence can be significant as either direct or corroborating evidence. In addition, expert testimony can be provided that allows a subject matter expert (vetted and accepted by the court) to offer opinions and interpretations (e.g., context) of other evidence that has been or will be presented. Real Evidence – Physical evidence. Examples would be a murder weapon, a hard disk drive, fingerprints, blood or other bodily fluids, clothing, stolen property, etc. Documentary Evidence – Documents (such as records, checks, or photographs) that are like real evidence in that it may be a physical item (e.g., printed material), but documentary evidence is also the results of the analysis of documents or records to show a pattern of behavior. For example, you examine (and create) potential documentary evidence each time you balance your checkbook. Demonstrative Evidence – Evidence that utilizes or requires a demonstration, such as the use of a chart or map, to help prove what happened. Demonstrative evidence is most often created by an expert witness; an example might be using a dummy to show how a person was standing when he was shot, or it could be a flow chart showing how money was moved between different accounts. All four types of evidence could be and frequently are used together in court to prove or disprove the facts of a case. Readings in Week 2 discussed search and seizure or the ability to retrieve evidence. Over the past two weeks, many of you have mentioned search warrants in your discussions. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (and the Supreme Court’s subsequent interpretations thereof) requires that before a search can be conducted and evidence can be seized, the Government must obtain a search and seizure warrant (based on probable cause) from an impartial magistrate. However, there is no requirement for a private person or organization to obtain a search warrant or work under the same constraints. Further, the line can be blurred, as a private person or organization that searches property or seizes evidence (not needing a warrant) could subsequently turn it over to the Government. In fact, they could do so even if the search was not legal under the Constitution, or even if they did not have the right to enter the place to be searched or committed civil trespass. Although it may seem counterintuitive and like a severe violation of individual rights, the only time the Fourth Amendment applies to a private party is if the private party is acting as an agent for the Government or law enforcement (such as a Government contractor or a citizen asked by a police detective to gather information for a specific purpose or investigation). There are, of course, exceptions to the requirements on the Government to obtain a search warrant prior to searching or seizing evidence. For example, the Government would not need a search warrant when a person with proper authority gives consent to conduct the search (e.g., the company CEO gives permission to search company servers for company data). Another exception is when there are exigent circumstances present that, if the time was taken to obtain a proper warrant, could result in the destruction of evidence or harm to another person; however, it should be noted that searches undertaken due to exigent circumstances must be followed-up with a legally obtained warrant as soon as the exigent circumstance has been effectively neutralized). Exigent circumstances could come into play in a digital evidence case when (for example) the owner of a computer likely containing digital evidence knows of the investigation and could delete the evidence from his storage devices before a warrant could be obtained. However, while the storage devices could most likely be seized without a warrant to prevent data destruction, this exigent circumstance is not a valid reason to conduct a forensic analysis of the storage media and a warrant should be obtained immediately. If evidence is not seized properly it may not be admissible in court. Therefore, it is important to know the rules governing what you can and cannot do (whether you are a private entity or an instrument of the Government), as well as being able to explain why you took the steps you did in order to sufficiently articulate your actions (from a legal perspective). This is also helpful in minimizing any potential civil liability. After you seize a computer or device and have obtained the proper authority to conduct a search of the contents, you must then be able to testify that your next steps were forensically sound and within the scope of your search authority (whether granted by consent or warrant). Unless special precautions are taken, you risk changing digital data on a device each time you access it. For this reason, it is important you avoid conducting an analysis of an original (evidence) device (such as the suspect’s hard drive removed from his computer), but instead make a forensically sound copy (i.e., a bit-for-bit copy of the original made without altering the original data, often accomplished with the use of a tool called a write-blocker) suitable for examination. In the readings, you will have read discussions of common tasks facing a digital investigator, such as identifying different types of devices you should look for when conducting a search; as well as the preservation and analysis of those devices. For this week’s discussion, complete the following two scenario questions below in detail. Please discuss thoroughly and substantively in your post. Additionally, respond in a thorough, substantive, intelligent way to at least one of your fellow classmates that adds to our discussion and learning of this week’s topic! 1.) You are a digital forensic examiner and have been asked to examine a hard drive for potential evidence. Give examples of how the hard drive (or the data on it) could be used as (or lead to the presentation of) all four types of evidence in court; testimonial, real, documentary, and demonstrative. If you do not believe one or more of the types of evidence would be included, explain why not. 2.) You have been asked to assist a law enforcement team serving a search warrant related to a child pornography investigation. You are the digital forensic expert for the team, and, as such, have been assigned the task of identifying and collecting the digital evidence at the search location. Answer the following questions about your assignment. What steps should you take before the search to serve the search warrant? What types of evidence should you be on the alert for, when searching the residence? What types of items would you seize?
Essay Help “>Essay Help
Essay Writing at Online Custom Essay
Review This Service