Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Second Turnback This Week Due to Unruly Pax

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by 3WE View Post

    Are you willing to discuss the issue of takeoff roll screw ups, which seem to occur from time to time...in that gray area of 'extremely rare', but conversely 'known and predictable'?
    Anything having to do with aviating is good.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
      i bet they cut plenty of corners and conveniently left out information in their applications or buried it nice and deep where it wouldnt be found
      1. Biology is amazingly imprecise.

      2. Feed lab rats pesticides, some of them will get cancer.

      Feed lab rats organic kale, non GM smoothies with free range milk from cows that are sang to, some of them get cancer.

      Give folks a CoVid vaccine and some of them have reactions…conversely some folks get real CoVid and have no symptoms. Give folks a CoVid vaccine and some get cancer. Give folks a CoVid vaccine and some of them die from the flu. Some folks get killed in car accidents on the way to get CoVid vaccines.

      I’m sure the vaccine is relatively safe…just like MCAS. The stats are, indeed, strong.

      But to TeeVee’s point, there’s likely some other vaccine data that may or may not mean something…and yeah, the long term safety experiment is underway right now.
      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post

        Anything having to do with aviating is good.
        JMO, some sort of acceleration tracking seems like it could be helpful. I’m always impressed with gross weight 747 takeoffs…and regardless of what you say, there’s some assumptions and risks that can sneak in there.

        I always thought a green, yellow or red color around the airspeed indication at 80 kts and V1 would be helpful.

        I apologize that I find situations where there are trade offs interesting, so pandemic responses and airplane operations are both interesting.

        Heck, look at an instrument rating that “frees” pilots to add risks to flying.
        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post

          oh so you ADMIT that the true experiment was testing it on the public after it was "approved" as safe.
          Let's talk about aviation instead. When a new airframe is designed, it is not just some wild idea thrown out there to see if it flies or falls like a stone. It is designed around known science, known airfoils, known aerodynamics, and then tested in scale models, in wind tunnels, in stress tests, so the engineers know that it is going to fly before long before it is rolled out and test pilots are brought in.

          Then the test pilots fly it extensively with all sorts of monitoring devices in every scenario that could be expected when it enters service. Only then it is certified as safe.

          Yet, in rare instances, certain problems still reveal themselves only through the accrued hours of commercial service. This doesn't mean the engineers are "testing it on the public". Some things just aren't foreseeable and may or may not be attributable to design issues. This is the phenomenal. It's just part of reality.

          Of course, the analogy is not a fair one: vaccine development is much more scrutinized and far less subject to corner cutting or half-measures.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Evan View Post
            Of course, the analogy is not a fair one: vaccine development is much more scrutinized and far less subject to corner cutting or half-measures.
            That’s a very bold and pretty much unsupported statement.

            I can think of several examples of how it could be wrong.

            But, your proclamation is, nevertheless, noted.

            https://youtu.be/PEy6968xO-I
            Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

            Comment


            • Sorry Bobby.

              Not _Orange El Presidente is CoVid positive AGAIN.

              Why aren’t Fauci, Vaccines, Masks, Social distancing, and the best Oversight and Adherence to the ScienceTM-backed Protocols protecting him?

              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Evan View Post

                Let's talk about aviation instead. When a new airframe is designed, it is not just some wild idea thrown out there to see if it flies or falls like a stone. It is designed around known science, known airfoils, known aerodynamics, and then tested in scale models, in wind tunnels, in stress tests, so the engineers know that it is going to fly before long before it is rolled out and test pilots are brought in.

                Then the test pilots fly it extensively with all sorts of monitoring devices in every scenario that could be expected when it enters service. Only then it is certified as safe.

                Yet, in rare instances, certain problems still reveal themselves only through the accrued hours of commercial service. This doesn't mean the engineers are "testing it on the public". Some things just aren't foreseeable and may or may not be attributable to design issues. This is the phenomenal. It's just part of reality.

                Of course, the analogy is not a fair one: vaccine development is much more scrutinized and far less subject to corner cutting or half-measures.
                right, exactly what boeing did with the MAX. they took an extremely safe airframe (mRNA tech) modified from its previous design (covid virus particles, proteins etc) and let it loose on the world after a few months of studies, all the while telling the regulators that the changes were small enough to avoid retraining etc etc. the FAA (FDA) bought boeing's assertions, and allowed them to release a potentially deadly aircraft on the flying public. in an eerily similar manner, in the 1000's of flights by MAXs there were almost zero (statistically speaking) deadly (adverse) events. yet, 346(?) people lost their lives in the 2 statistically insignificant events.

                not at all a great analogy, but it was yours to begin with.

                btw, i do understand that there is risk in everything. even aspirin which has been given billions of times has potentially fatal effects. and yes, i personally accepted the vaccines with their associated risks.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                  Sorry Bobby.

                  Not _Orange El Presidente is CoVid positive AGAIN.

                  Why aren’t Fauci, Vaccines, Masks, Social distancing, and the best Oversight and Adherence to the ScienceTM-backed Protocols protecting him?

                  was that rhetorical? i think my non-medically trained friend called it right back in 2020: everyone is gonna get this bug multiple times and nearly everyone will survive and build a type of immunity but not one that will prevent the disease 100%--kinda like the cold.

                  i just tested negative myself after 5 days of being positive.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post

                    was that rhetorical? i think my non-medically trained friend called it right back in 2020: everyone is gonna get this bug multiple times and nearly everyone will survive and build a type of immunity but not one that will prevent the disease 100%--kinda like the cold.

                    i just tested negative myself after 5 days of being positive.
                    Yes it was rhetorical, to Evan, and represents a genuine lack of precision in biological systems, including whatever Uber-specific slice of biology that he unconditionally worships as correct.

                    I think your friend is correct, along with “the virus is gonna virus”, and the mathematical issue of “big-ass numbers times tiny-ass numbers”.

                    ”Kinda like the [common] cold”…Indeed.


                    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post

                      right, exactly what boeing did with the MAX. they took an extremely safe airframe (mRNA tech) modified from its previous design (covid virus particles, proteins etc) and let it loose on the world after a few months of studies, all the while telling the regulators that the changes were small enough to avoid retraining etc etc. the FAA (FDA) bought boeing's assertions, and allowed them to release a potentially deadly aircraft on the flying public. in an eerily similar manner, in the 1000's of flights by MAXs there were almost zero (statistically speaking) deadly (adverse) events. yet, 346(?) people lost their lives in the 2 statistically insignificant events.
                      No.

                      What Boeing did was panic and create a solution by taking a safe airframe and contorting it into filling a role for which it was not intended. Part of that contortion was conspiratorial and key to that conspiracy was the internalisation of the oversight and certification agency. It all relied upon corruption and zero transparency.

                      mRNA was the A320 NEO.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                        Sorry Bobby.

                        Not _Orange El Presidente is CoVid positive AGAIN.

                        Why aren’t Fauci, Vaccines, Masks, Social distancing, and the best Oversight and Adherence to the ScienceTM-backed Protocols protecting him?

                        They are quite clearly protecting him. He’s 79 and, so far, doing fine (despite the BA.5 rebound)

                        Originally posted by 3WE
                        i just tested negative myself after 5 days of being positive.
                        Congratulations, but watch for the rebound (keep testing for a few days). You could still be contagious.

                        Every time any of gets the virus, it’s another opportunity for it to mutate into something more resistant to the vaccines or treatments. The virus is gonna virus a lot quicker if we don’t do our part to slow it down. It’s that simple.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                          Sorry Bobby.

                          Not _Orange El Presidente is CoVid positive AGAIN.

                          Why aren’t Fauci, Vaccines, Masks, Social distancing, and the best Oversight and Adherence to the ScienceTM-backed Protocols protecting him?

                          Because people didn't give a shit! More important to go to Walmart than stay home. The saddest thing about it is, history repeats itself and some of the people don't learn from it.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                            What Boeing did was create a solution by taking a safe airframe and contorting it into filling a role for which it was not intended.
                            There is nothing intrinsically wrong with that, as I am certain the MAX will show with it's post-MCAS 2.0 safety record.
                            It is called repurposing.

                            Now, if instead of doing it the right engineering way, it is done in a criminal way, then there is a lot wrong with that, regardless of whether it is a repurposed old design or a brand new purpose-specific design.

                            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

                              There is nothing intrinsically wrong with that, as I am certain the MAX will show with it's post-MCAS 2.0 safety record.
                              It is called repurposing.
                              There is something wrong with that, regardless of what the MAX will show with its post-death trap safety record.

                              Repurposing must be restricted to things that do not exceed the parameters of the core design under which the thing was certified as safe. Otherwise, it needs to be entirely re-certified as a different thing by a truly independent oversight agency. Had that been the case with the MAX, the MAX wouldn’t exist, and we would be even safer with the new protected FBW 797.

                              mRNA is the 797.

                              Comment


                              • https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-...pact/101266844

                                Well I'll be damned. I guess masks do help.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X