>You think I was rude asking you about your experience.

You asked for a number. Who I am, doesn't factor in. The experiences and insights I can bring to the conversation do. Of which I provided more than enough to get you in the right ballpark experiencewise.

>We don't know anything about the hardware this runs on and what it has to interface with.

These are essentially networked embedded microcomputers, likely utilizing various potential protocol stacks such as

CAN, CAN FD
AFDX® / ARINC 664
ARINC 429
ARINC 825
Ethernet
CANopen
for networking.

They are likely highly constrained, and must be compliant with DO-178B/C, which includes a need to verify the software down to the op codes spit out by the compiler.

The most popular languages for this purpose are known to be C, C++, FORTRAN, and Ada.

There's this wonderful place called the Internet where Engineers and other really dedicated people share information about what they use to do things.

>Arbitrary complexity
Is a possibility, but tends to be bounded by the fact humans still need to be able to implement and verify the systems they make in a reasonable amount of time. Which coincidentally, seems to have missed a few layers or so given we're here talking about this.

The world has very little that can't be found with a little digging, and in the interests of saving time, we tend to reuse technologies when appropriate from things like, cars, in other things, like airplanes.

If you can gain a mastery of how to network and program computers in general, you gain insights into how other physical systems, even though they aren't Turing machines, interconnect and propagate information and forces.

If you can then understand engineering principles well enough to decompose complex things into a network of simpler basic parts, and understand how to employ mathematics to analyze and predict the behavior of those systems, you can quickly formulate broad guesses about contributory factors to a failure state given the even small amounts of information.

And if you say all that's impossible to appear in one person, I don't know what to tell you. I'm not asking you to have faith, I'm asking you to think, question, imagine, and connect the dots between what information is available out there.

But hey, what do I know? I'm just a guy who objects to having credibility pidgeonholed based on some number instead of the content of what is being communicated.

I apologize if I sound aggravated or hostile, but I do not appreciate it when something as tightly regulated as aircraft out of the blue starts killing people, and the reason looks to be a lack of scrutiny/verification, rushed implementation, intentionally sparse communication, and unethical sales practices for whatever reason.

There are ways to do things, and there are ways not to do things. I expect a leader of an industry to at least show a level of effort such that I can entertain the benefit of a doubt that gross incompetence Or greed was not a factor. I have no such illusions left to me based upon what I've been able to work out. The cause is somewhere in their culture or business practices, and I want it ripped out into the light as an example to everyone, everywhere.

I don't care half as much about what happens to the people involved as long as it is enough to dissuade anyone thinking of doing the same thing from going down that path.