Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

User Profile

Collapse

Profile Sidebar

Collapse
Avatar
Schwartz
Member
Last Activity: 2019-12-08, 22:55
Joined: 2009-01-18
Location:
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
  • Source
Clear All
new posts

  • Guessing it snuck into carry-on luggage....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Schwartz
    replied to New web format
    Thank you for getting it back up and running so quickly....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Almost certainly not. That would require a change to every single airplane. This is only the ability to track existing transponders....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Schwartz
    replied to New web format
    They didn't upgrade the old system for far too long and it seems it got hacked....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Interesting and notable observation, because this wouldn't be the first airbus to crash because the plane didn't do what was expected or input under non-revenue flight conditions.



    I think most aircraft incidents involve fantastically bad days. They happen... not very often, but they do.

    I think you're missing the point. You can't predict how this or some similar vulnerability will exhibit itself. Arguable this already was a rare set of circumstances which allowed -- not for the first, or the last time -- the aircraft to ignore the pilots and do something seemingly incomprehensible. The odds of incomprehensible behaviour from a system like these planes (both Boeing and Airbus) increases with the amount of redundancy and intermediaries between the pilot and the plane. That is a pretty indisputable design principle.

    This is why I raised this incident on the other thread. Your posts there imply that redundancy can just be added and it will...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • These pilots were very very lucky. A lot of things went well enough for them to survive especially given that the engines lasted just long enough to support their quick turn back to the runway.

    They also lucked out from the timing, it appears the only reason they were able to climb out initially was because the landing gear was in transit and the front gear pushed the nose up as the engines spooled up. This is why they were able to gain altitude and figure out how to get the plane back to the runway....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan,



    I disagree about it being phenomenal. This is a classic software/logic timing problem. I see this problem in software all the time. This complexity arose because a computer has to translate multiple concurrent data streams into a single decision, and due to the limitations of computers -- things like sample rates, and ordering -- the logic can be quite complex and error prone. Testing of all combinations is also impossible -- usually because there is an infinite number of conditions. These failure scenarios are often quite rare -- which is why well designed systems don't fail all the time -- but under heavy use (like millions of flight hours and conditions) they tend to happen eventually. Just like this one did.

    There is a big trade-off between increasing redundancy automation vs simplicity. When biasing toward the former, the problem relies on the designers and developers being able to accurate predict potential conditions that might...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

No activity results to display
Show More
Working...
X