This video from "Mentour pilot" has been deleted (supposedly upon request from boeing): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzgBft-79U8 You can see it here (european version of youtube): https://vimeo.com/329558134 Or more info here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19627525
Vimeo is based in NYC USA, how is it "European version of YouTube"?
Boeing 737 MAX crash and the rejection of ridiculous data
61–70 of 194 posts
Re: Boeing 737 MAX crash and the rejection of ridiculous data
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Strongly suggest everyone check out the video. It's...kind of shocking.
One thing I don't understand is that if the trim is stuck in a position that pushes the plane down, shouldn't the high speed (and therefore strong air flow) help to put the trim back in a neutral position rather than making it more difficult?
Re: Boeing 737 MAX crash and the rejection of ridiculous data
#63How does it feel to enter a world where software is killing people ? Driven a new car lately ?
... I avoided running over that child I couldn't see in my rear-view because the infrared sensors picked him up as a mobile object intersecting my path and the backup warning screamed at me. I like not killing people, so I call that a win.
Re: Boeing 737 MAX crash and the rejection of ridiculous data
#64It should be noted in the doomed Air France 447 flight, the plane activated the stall warning because of a high angle of attack that was leading to stall. (thanks pdx for the corrected info) At some point the system rejected the data and stopped the stall warning because the angle of attack was so severe that it considered the data erroneous. This is speculated to have caused the co-pilot to keep pulling back on the…
That's true, but the pilot response was insanity. When the stick shaker comes on you push the nose down every time without question, unless perhaps you're at very low altitude and then you might be in an unrecoverable situation anyway... but you don't pull back :)
Re: Boeing 737 MAX crash and the rejection of ridiculous data
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Philip Greenspun is a highly experienced pilot: https://philip.greenspun.com/flying/milestones
He doesn't seem to be an experienced owner of a home outdoor thermometer though. Or if he is, I need to know where he found one that goes to 452 degrees and why he even needs that much range. ;)
Re: Boeing 737 MAX crash and the rejection of ridiculous data
#66With all due respect, this sounds too much like the kind of armchair quarterbacking that routinely appears on HN when avionics/politics/astronomy is mentioned, where a lone programmer feels competent enough to criticize an industry for missing "something obvious". I mean, this particular change might have saved the particular 737, but I'd rather hear it from someone who actually knows how 737s fly.
I agree that we frequently see this on HN in regards to aviation. However, I don;t think it applies to Greenspun. He's a knowledgeable and active pilot himself.
Re: Boeing 737 MAX crash and the rejection of ridiculous data
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Philip Greenspun is a highly experienced pilot: https://philip.greenspun.com/flying/milestones
He doesn't seem to be an experienced owner of a home outdoor thermometer though. Or if he is, I need to know where he found one that goes to 452 degrees and why he even needs that much range. ;)
Re: Boeing 737 MAX crash and the rejection of ridiculous data
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Philip Greenspun is a highly experienced pilot: https://philip.greenspun.com/flying/milestones
He doesn't seem to be an experienced owner of a home outdoor thermometer though. Or if he is, I need to know where he found one that goes to 452 degrees and why he even needs that much range. ;)
Re: Boeing 737 MAX crash and the rejection of ridiculous data
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's more an issue of Boeing essentially signing off on their own certification as functionally the same type when it is a very different plane. The AOA calculation is also much more complicated than the article explains. There is a speed element, engine power, etc.
AoA is just that: angle of attack ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_attack ) The sensor simply measures the angle of the airflow with respect to the airframe. In fact it is just a free-moving surface attached to the airframe.
Classic 737s climb via trim, not constant stick inputs. This has changed slightly with the MAX but now you have automated AoA correction (involving trim). That's a nasty combination.
Re: Boeing 737 MAX crash and the rejection of ridiculous data
#70My brother one time actually succeeded in wiring ten million euros instead of ten million forints. The exchange ratio is 1:320. Obviously the account didn't have 10M EUR on it.
I just entered 300 USD as a courier tip into the food order app I just tried for the first time because I expected it'll just do 3.00 for me. I caught it before sending it.
All of these are lacking this kind of defensive validation. I recognize the irony of not even knowing the terminus technicus for it despite I am a senior sw developer with decades of experience.