On 1/25/2020 2:17 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, January 23, 2020 at 10:58:52 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 20:35:54 -0500, Clare Snyder
wrote:

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 13:04:43 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 07:20:19 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Thursday, January 23, 2020 at 2:51:24 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 18:56:03 -0800, Bob F wrote:

On 1/22/2020 9:10 AM, Guilaumme Faury wrote:
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/22/trum...sis-grows.html


At one time, Boeing knew how to build airplanes.

When engineers ran the company - before the bean counters took over.
Capitalism at it's best today.

There is nothing wrong with the plane, they have a software problem.

That's a good one two. And it's not really a software problem, it's
a DESIGN problem. The programmers didn't make a mistake, the program
does what they were told to make it do. If you bought a TV that didn't
work, that you could not use because of a "software problem",
would you say there was nothing wrong with the TV?



It isn't the bean counters, it is those kids in sneakers who are
writing the bugware.

Totally wrong. There is ZERO evidence that I have seen, that this was
a problem created by the programmers. The program did what it was
designed to do.

So I guess you have the specs the programmers were working with.
Please give us a link so we can all see.

Some programmer decided when MCAS was supposed to be operating how it
was monitored. My bet, they just gave them broad parameters of what
sensors were available and what actuators they had to use. They also
decided to only use one AOA sensor when two were available and not to
alert the pilot when they did not agree.
The latter actually being the fatal flaw. My guess is the programmers
don't know **** about airplanes, they just write video game type
software and do not take into account dealing with hardware failures.

If the beanies said "we need to cut the base price, so only put in one
AOA sensor - make a second one an extra cost option" the code kiddies
design around that parameter. Can't blame the code kiddies for that.

Both sensors are there. I doubt some suit in Seattle was involved at
that level. It was just a few more lines of code to compare the
sensors and turn on a light if they disagreed. In fact that was an
option. Those 3d world suits decided not to buy it.

Correct, but there is no reason to believe having the disagree light
would have made any difference. Remember, there was no explanation of
what MCAS was, how it works in the aircraft manuals. The only
mention of it that could be found was in the glossary of terms,
where MCAS was listed.




I agree the training was lacking but it seems the 3d world airlines
had all the trouble, in spite of flying the max a fraction of what
airlines like Southwest were flying.

Which again is totally unfair. The AOA sensors only failed on two
aircraft, LionAir and Ethiopian Air. We don't know that the outcome
would have been any different if it had happened to SW or American.
We do know that the Ethiopian airline crew followed the exact procedure
that Boeing recommended after the Lion Air crash and that it did not
work. The co-pilots last words were that he was unable to move the
trim wheel by hand. Those are the facts, not speculation. Boeing even
screwed up the procedure to recover that they put in place after the
first crash. There is obviously a whole lot of incompetence at Boeing.


But Boeing has gotten something right, at least so far, the new 777-X made
it's first flight a few hours ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4t7L6p2Rug


Looks nice, I hope they do better than the Max.
I've only ever piloted single engine stuff, would love to just take off,
circle and land one of those. There is a place not too far from me
where I could get simulator time.