The aviation industry has been doing this for many decades and no doubt have pre-built solutions that could be adopted.
The medical equipment industry has similar software.
It's a matter of obtaining the intellectual property for the real-time OSs and such. The apps would be different but the underlying real-time kernel could be the same. The value of well-debugged real-time software would be high. But would management recognize that?
The old question, build or buy?

The tech manual will be automatically installed on your smartphone when you buy or rent the car.

Um, TFA is Tata Football Academy?

Ask your optometrist for "Computer glasses". They know what they are:

1. Wider field of view that doesn't change prescription going left to right or up and down. The whole screen in in focus and is clear at once. Also the other screen. So you can change what you're looking at by moving your eyes, not your head.
2. Focused about an arm's length away. Not close like reading. And not "Distance". This is the key.
3. Can be the upper half of visible-line bifocals, with the lower half a reading prescription.
4. None of the shape-distortion that happens with progressive lenses, where straight lines can look curved.

This is especially important as you get older. Half the problem with elders failing to use computers is they can not read the screen. And be sure to keep your computer glasses near the computer, and don't wear them for driving, running, or even hiking. You may need a pair of "distance" glasses for that.

Your prescription may vary. If you're 18 years old with good vision, you don't need any glasses at all.

Or this: A dragline.

And if that Bolivia was between Mexico and the US, and kept on sending rockets, suicide bombers, and kidnappers, America would quickly get completely fed up and blast 'em to smithereens. Instead of 1700 dead there'd be 17,000. Or more. Arguments over news reporting would be a footnote.

Just web search for 'Qatar vs Saudi Arabia' and you'll see over a billion results. Hot enough for you?

There are no independent sources. I suppose we could imagine a super news organization that ran its own spy network. But on this planet, media get their information, especially on military matters, from the interested parties.

We already knew Israel had a high-tech military. But who of us knew Hamas was going that way too?

1. We don't have a good definition of "Terrorism" that is shared among us all, so the term becomes kicked around and abused. So I've stopped using it. By the way, the Hebrew word for terrorism does not involve the concept of terror or fear.

2. The governments involved, including the PA, have come to believe in a "Two State Solution", but Hamas does not. And Hamas is in a position to threaten the success of any 2-state plan, by taking over the West Bank, and starting another war with Israel. I believe this is the reason that Hamas is being destroyed. I think this is why the PA and several Arab states are very muted in their criticism of Israel during this war: Hamas is their enemy too.

   If Israel does not destroy Hamas this time around, then my theory is probably wrong.

3. Hamas never sought anything peacefully. The PA has engaged in diplomacy, but Hamas, not. The rest of your narrative is one-sided, propagandistic and tendentious, too.

As war becomes more Tech vs Tech, slight technical advantages can snowball into huge military advantages. Especially if you can modify the actions of your enemies systems in real-time.

The Times of Israel article doesn't say Hamas is funded with billions. It says Qatar spends that much on defense, some of which goes to Hamas.

I propose direct intervention by God. He should give precise instructions to each individual and group regarding where to live and what to do. We've lost the message.

Lacking that, some level of violence will continue.

The article you link to was from June 30. It was after then that Hamas increased its rocketing big time.