It amazes me in this day and age that people don't realise that anything they say on these systems can be dug out and read by anybody, anywhere at any time ...
You're not thinking about this with every keystroke even if you know this. I certainly don't.
I do. I've only ever worked for public universities or state owned organizations, so every work email I've ever written is theoretically accessible via an open records request. I write every email as if it's going to be published on the front page of my local paper.
While I agree with this sentiment, buying tickets specifying Airbus, and having the airline switch them to Boeing one week before travel time (as happened to me this holiday season) means I wouldn't be able to do any long distance travel. Is there a way to mitigate this?
On AA, for example, you can improve your odds of getting an Airbus aircraft if you route through a former US Airways hub (e.g. CLT).
You might find similar patterns for other carriers if you search by city pairs.
Equipment swaps are pretty unusual for international routes, too, because it's harder to reaccommodate people. I think you were unlucky and shouldn't expect that in the future.
Not on Ryanair. The CEO explicitly said that their plane allocation is defined 24 hours before the flight and if the passengers discover that the plane is a max they are welcome to not fly but they won’t get any refund.Ah, and they had the balls to rename their max planes to 737-8800 or something similar trying to deceive everyone. Result: it’s almost 1 year that I don’t fly with Ryanair even if before this I used it…
Classic Ryanair. You can't fault the consistency of their customer service. Thanks for posting this, it's genuinely useful.
Interesting to note that Ryanair is currently exclusively a Boeing 737 airline. It has 367 Boeing 737-800 aircraft in service (the largest operator of this aircraft) and 135 Boeing 737 Max 200 on order. [1]
> The company official said the language used and sentiments expressed in these communications "are inconsistent with Boeing values, and the company is taking appropriate action in response." Do you think this means: a) Change the environment that fosters those kinds of messages? -or- b) Punish those who wrote those messages?
Why not both?
Do you honestly expect anything _but_ [punishment for the ones who got outed]?
To be fair, flying in MAX was/would still be orders of magnitude safer than pretty much any other transportation method outside flying. (No, I don't think I still want to fly that, either)
Only per mile. Per journey it's the most dangerous transport typically used. Per hour it's about average. This doesn't matter if you have to make a specific trip (the number of miles is fixed), but that's not always the case. Whatever you do, don't walk, that seems to be the most dangerous common mode of transportation (unless motorcycles are common). "Aviation industry insurers base their calculations on the deaths…
> don't walk, that seems to be the most dangerous common mode of transportation
Not walking is also a bad idea, though. I don't have numbers at hand, but I can imagine that a sedentary lifestyle gives you way more micromorts than the risk of traffic accidents when walking to work.
This makes me angry. Not that 3 hours of simulator training would have helped in either crash. The problem wasn't that the ipad course was inadequate training for the new procedures (as he said there were no major procedural differences), but that any mention of MCAS had been removed from the manual to avoid needing new or modified procedures. Even worse, MCAS was designed to be near-impossible to override, using dat…
Also in the emails, a discussion about renaming MCAS to make it seem like it was just a tweak to existing control software, rather than a new feature needing documentation and training....
Oh yeah, that was interesting. They were renaming it to be part of the Speed Trim System, with the MCAS name used only internally. After doing some looking, apparently the STS is a system on all 737s that adjusts the stabilizer in order to increase the stick force. This is necessary to ensure the plane meets the FAR speed stability requirement for the minimum increase in stick force as the plane moves away from the current speed. It does this by moving the stabilizer in a way that opposes the flight stick input, and is active 5 seconds after the last manual trim input when autopilot is off. If you've been following the discussion of MCAS, all of those details are probably feeling awfully familiar...
It amazes me in this day and age that people don't realise that anything they say on these systems can be dug out and read by anybody, anywhere at any time ...
You're not thinking about this with every keystroke even if you know this. I certainly don't.
I'll echo the other comments here, too. I never put anything in writing that I'm not comfortable being published publicly. Working in the public sector and being subject to public records requests, and working in the private sector and having my emails quoted by opposing counsel to a judge during a lawsuit both taught me the value of being exceedingly careful in what I write.
Because Boeing is a company of national importance and also a monopoly on home turf, vital to the US security and economy so they're untouchable in the US. Just like how no VW employee went to jail in Germany for emissions cheating.
VW wasn't nearly as bad. People need to go to jail over those deaths and their legacy used as a reminder for those that come next. Here is another damning Boeing message, follow the source for more: https://twitter.com/cedivad/status/1215558552229683200
When the defeat device was turned off during normal engine use its emissions went up by 40x the legal limit. VW's scandal was unprecedented in my opinion. The NOx emitted by those filthy cars are awful for anyone with respiratory issues.
>>The language used in these communications, and some of the sentiments they express, are inconsistent with Boeing values, and the company is taking appropriate action in response. This will ultimately include disciplinary or other personnel action, once the necessary reviews are completed. And that my friends is all that you need to know about the boeing of 2020.
About a year ago, I was considering investing in Boeing. I would have made a good chunk of change doing so. I'm glad today I decided not to.
Yup. Talk as much crap as you want in person, but what goes in email and web messages and pull-requests and code comments must be immaculate.
Heh, this reminds me: at a former employer, the eng team communicated exclusively by IRC (when Slack was already a thing) specifically because the CTO had previously experienced his communications being picked apart and taken out of context when his old company had ended up in the scope of a congressional investigation. So that's one way around it...
If it's being logged, it's subject to the discovery process, regardless of what protocol you're using.