ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags airplane incidents , government shutdown

Reply
Old 7th August 2019, 12:26 PM   #321
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 23,782
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
that is kinda hilarious.

Boeing might be better of giving them away for free - maybe Trump can afford his airline after all!
Why would any airline accept delivery of a grounded airliner? Until they are allowed to fly again they are not going to be delivering any of them.

It does sound a lot like the sort of business move Trump would be attracted to.
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."

"Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2019, 12:49 PM   #322
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,493
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Quote:
Boeing might be better of giving them away for free - maybe Trump can afford his airline after all!
Why would any airline accept delivery of a grounded airliner? Until they are allowed to fly again they are not going to be delivering any of them.
He was joking about Trump.

Trump would probably fly the planes anyways (even if they were grounded), and then complain to the FAA if they crashed.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2019, 01:06 PM   #323
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,158
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Why would any airline accept delivery of a grounded airliner? Until they are allowed to fly again they are not going to be delivering any of them.
Indeed, as the photo shows, there's a cost of ownership - just in the storage space if nothing else.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2019, 01:33 PM   #324
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,493
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Indeed, as the photo shows, there's a cost of ownership - just in the storage space if nothing else.
The referenced article points out that storage costs are $2000/month per plane.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2019, 03:14 PM   #325
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 40,530
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post


"FAA representatives were present during a test flight when an MCAS problem occurred, according to a regulatory source, but approved the MAX without independently studying or testing the flight system. "




JESUS H TAP-DANCING CHRIST!!!! REALLY?
It's interesting. The story had been pulled.

Option A) Story was a beat up so it was pulled
Option B) Story was shut down by Boeing lawyers.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th August 2019, 03:57 PM   #326
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 24,700
Here is another video about the 737 max.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


It explains what made Boeing produce this aircraft.
__________________
This signature is for rent.
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 11:34 AM   #327
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,683
I have been very surprised over the past month as I've learned more and more about the increasing computerization of commercial aircraft. It is, of course, not just the Boeing 737. Many planes are programmed not only to sense and correct for conditions outside of the normal flight envelop (i.e in an emergency) but are also designed to sense the different stages of a typical flight and automatically make the "correct" control settings for that stage. Throttles in particular appear to often be automated to automatically respond to particular situations as the plane's computer perceives them. This can include automatic reductions in the throttle settings if the computer senses the plane is landing or about to land, or automatic increases in throttle setting if the computer senses the plane is taking off. These often operate outside of the auto-pilot per se and often without the explicit knowledge of the human pilots. Indeed the human pilots are often not well informed as to the existence of these programs nor are they very familiar or practiced in turning them off, leading to a variety of accidents (some fatal) as the humans wrestle with the mysterious and unexpected actions of the computer. The 737 situation is just a highly visible peak of the iceberg.

BTW: in reading about these accidents it appears to me that the inputs from the angle of attack sensors are particularly critical for the computer programs to function; it is amazing to me that Boeing felt okay eliminating any redundancy for this critical component in the 737 max redesign.

Last edited by Giordano; 11th August 2019 at 11:35 AM.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 12:10 PM   #328
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,158
I do wonder if modern distributed sensors could measure lift more directly by looking at the strain on the top surface of wings.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 04:35 PM   #329
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 40,530
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
I have been very surprised over the past month as I've learned more and more about the increasing computerization of commercial aircraft. It is, of course, not just the Boeing 737. Many planes are programmed not only to sense and correct for conditions outside of the normal flight envelop (i.e in an emergency) but are also designed to sense the different stages of a typical flight and automatically make the "correct" control settings for that stage. Throttles in particular appear to often be automated to automatically respond to particular situations as the plane's computer perceives them. This can include automatic reductions in the throttle settings if the computer senses the plane is landing or about to land, or automatic increases in throttle setting if the computer senses the plane is taking off. These often operate outside of the auto-pilot per se and often without the explicit knowledge of the human pilots. Indeed the human pilots are often not well informed as to the existence of these programs nor are they very familiar or practiced in turning them off, leading to a variety of accidents (some fatal) as the humans wrestle with the mysterious and unexpected actions of the computer. The 737 situation is just a highly visible peak of the iceberg.

BTW: in reading about these accidents it appears to me that the inputs from the angle of attack sensors are particularly critical for the computer programs to function; it is amazing to me that Boeing felt okay eliminating any redundancy for this critical component in the 737 max redesign.
The problem with the Max is that it is so old it hasn't been computerised enough. The fact is pilot error is a cause of many crashes, not computer error.

The Max crashes were caused by a half baked solution to a problem that was created when large, hi- tech engines were added to a 1960's frame.

There is a joke that in the future the crew of a passenger plane will be a pilot and a dog. The pilots job will be to watch the computer fly the plane and the dogs job will be to make sure the pilot doesn't touch anything.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 06:13 PM   #330
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
I do wonder if modern distributed sensors could measure lift more directly by looking at the strain on the top surface of wings.
A system as vital as MCAS should certainly be relying on more than one sensor to determine the aircraft's AoA. Wing strain is one way, multiple AoA sensors on the fuselage, and stall warning tabs on the wing leading edges would be another.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 06:57 PM   #331
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 23,782
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
The problem with the Max is that it is so old it hasn't been computerised enough. The fact is pilot error is a cause of many crashes, not computer error.

The Max crashes were caused by a half baked solution to a problem that was created when large, hi- tech engines were added to a 1960's frame.

<snip>

Yes. If that solution had not been "half baked" then the crashes may well have been avoided.

This is not necessarily an indictment of the airframe itself, or of the effort to refit it with larger engines. Just that it wasn't done very well, with due consideration for process and review.

I'm not saying that it wasn't a completely misguided idea to begin with. I don't know enough to make that evaluation.

I do think that what we have learned about the cause of these crashes is not proof that the effort was misguided from the start.
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."

"Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 09:22 PM   #332
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
I do think that what we have learned about the cause of these crashes is not proof that the effort was misguided from the start.
The effort or the idea was not misguided, but the execution of that idea was abysmal.

Using a single sensor to detect AoA (and therefore stall) and delivering the resulting information to the pilot via a warning buzzer would be a bad enough idea as it was, although in a conventional aircraft, any pilot worth the name would pick up faulty indication quickly. The problem comes when you use such a risky system, and then feed the resulting information directly into the flight computer and allow it to autonomously control the aircraft.

I am still old school when it comes to flying. I believe that there ought to be a "manual override" that allows the pilots to completely bypass the flight computer and put the control stick/yoke in direct connection with the control surfaces. Had the Lion Air and the Ethiopian Airways pilots had such a system available to them, they could simply have switched out the computer and flown the aircraft themselves until they got past the danger point. Pilots should never, ever have to fight the computer for control of their aircraft.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 11th August 2019 at 10:32 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 10:15 PM   #333
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 40,530
A better solution would have been to design a new narrowbody. Boeing was due for one anyway. In the long run it would have worked out cheaper and safer.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 02:09 AM   #334
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 24,700
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
A better solution would have been to design a new narrowbody. Boeing was due for one anyway. In the long run it would have worked out cheaper and safer.
Agreed. Though this would have meant that many pilots would need extensive training on the new aircraft. This is what the 737 max avoided.

I hope the next aircraft from Boeing is the sort of plane where there is one pilot whose main job it is to communicate with the ground and look out for emergencies.
__________________
This signature is for rent.
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 10:20 PM   #335
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,683
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
The problem with the Max is that it is so old it hasn't been computerised enough. The fact is pilot error is a cause of many crashes, not computer error.

The Max crashes were caused by a half baked solution to a problem that was created when large, hi- tech engines were added to a 1960's frame.

There is a joke that in the future the crew of a passenger plane will be a pilot and a dog. The pilots job will be to watch the computer fly the plane and the dogs job will be to make sure the pilot doesn't touch anything.
I respectfully, but strongly disagree with this statement. In most of the cases I have read, the pilots were actually implementing the correct procedures and the automated systems were fighting them and creating the danger, often invisibly to the pilots. In many of these cases the plots were not told of the existence of the automated intervention, they ran outside of the envelop of the situations that any automation was expected by the pilots, and they activated without clear signals that they were activated. In other cases the pilots received very minimal or obscure, hand-waving information of the existence of the automation and very brief information as to how to turn them off, which in some cases were inaccurate or, on turning off the system, did not adequately inform the pilots as to the additional procedures needed for a recovery i.e. taking into account the aerodynamic forces now present on hand-off by the computer. Amazingly even when successfully turned off by the pilots the automated systems often repeatedly turned themselves back on! As with the 737 max, the manufacturers often attempted to minimize the need for any new training for the pilots to keep expenses to the airlines down.

I think that increasing automation for aircraft is great, indeed necessary. But there entire fields of study on how to write critical code, and how to create interfaces between computers and people in these life and death situations, yet not implemented adequately by the plane manufacturers. And for now one still needs human pilots in many emergency situations and it must be obvious, easy, and definitive how the pilots can turn off an automation that is clearly endangering the plane, such as making strong nose down commands as with the 737 stretch.

Perhaps the dog should be trained to bite the appropriate computer module instead of the pilot?
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:37 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.