201–210 of 924 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Report says the switches went to cutoff one second apart from each other. Can a human do the physical operation on two switches that quickly?
There's a good photo of them here; https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safety/ai171-investigatio... You can do them both with one hand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sometimes people put cleaning liquid in the fridge. Given a long enough span of time, every possible fuck up eventually will happen.
Probably time to design a plane that can't be sent into terrain in seconds by flipping a switch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s a big deal to me not to spread misinformation or be mistaken in a situation like this. Then why not either wait until there's more information or temper your remarks by acknowledging there's still ambiguity? That would directly hedge against spreading misinformation, whereas staking your reputation on it and then shutting up if you're wrong only works after the misinformation has spread and doesn't seem very p…
I was about to leave a big reply, but then I remembered that the guidelines ask that we only comment when feeling intellectual curiosity. That’s not what I’m feeling now, so I’ll go spend the evening with my daughter. I hope you have a nice evening as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The report says the co-pilot was flying. The report says the black box reports the fuel cutoff switches being activated. That doesn't necessarily mean that either of the two pilots activated them, it just means that the fly-by-wire system reacted to a fuel cutoff event. "The aircraft achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 Knots IAS at about 08:08:42 UTC and immediately thereafter, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fue…
> That doesn't necessarily mean that either of the two pilots activated them It does: 1. Those switches have physical interlocks and cannot be manipulated by any computer system. 2. The flight data recorder is measuring the position of the switches; they aren't inferring the position from some system state. There's a "position of this switch" channel. The switches were physically moved in the cockpit, that's basicall…
The fact that your car's engine stops doesn't mean you turned the ignition switch off. Anyone who has had to troubleshoot a car with intermitent electrical faults knows that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fire, probably. But also, how complicated would you make the system if you needed to prevent certain switches from working during certain times of flight? At some point... we're all just in the hands of the people in the cockpit.
I can't put my car into reverse gear while driving down the freeway.
This is a rather odd comparison. You can slam the brakes, yank the steering week, and do all sorts of things to intentionally make the car crash.
[flagged]
> This was not suicide, or murder-suicide; it was one of the most horrific mass murders in history, in which the guy that did it happened to lose his life in the process. Even taking intent for granted, to deny suicide in a case like this would be to suppose that the person responsible expected to survive while everyone else died . What could possibly support that conclusion?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People do things bizarre, inexplicable things all the time. It's called a brain fart... the human brain is complicated, sometimes wires just get crossed. Honestly I think the chances are good that you're right, but the way you're presenting it as absolutely certain strikes me as overconfident, borderline arrogant. Also, what's with the whole "staking your reputation" thing? What reputation? Are you some kind of famou…
Well, you do now. :) It’s mostly a very public "If I’m wrong, I won’t ever do this again." I’ve been writing informative HN comments since 2008 on various accounts. It’s a big deal to me not to spread misinformation or be mistaken in a situation like this. The victims also deserve to be acknowledged. At this point the overwhelming body of evidence points to a deliberate act. Pilots are trained never to touch the fuel…
I understand that you appear earnest. However, your history of multi-accounting on this site makes your promise to never post on a given topic again meaningless to me, because I have no expectation that you wouldn’t continue to post about it on other accounts that we don’t know about at this time, possibly because they haven’t even been created yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/NM-18-33 well hold your horses there... from the FAA in their 2019 report linked above: > The Boeing Company (Boeing) received reports from operators of Model 737 airplanes that the fuel control switches were installed with the locking feature disengaged. The fuel control switches (or engine start switches) are installed on the control stand in the flight deck and used by the pilot to sup…
Well, can you move it back, when accidentally activated?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can't find a definitive source right now, but everything is implying there are discrete lines - at least one for command signal to the FADECs, and a separate sense line to the DFDAU for packaging up and sending to the EAFR. That lines up with design philosophy on this stuff of sensing control input data as close to the source as you can get.
Thanks for looking. I worked for Boeing (satellites, not airplanes) for a good part of my career, and I was there when Dennis Muilenburg pushed through his cost saving measures. It was the same culture that created the problems with the 737-MAX. Experienced design engineers were replaced/outsourced and the culture of safety was sacrificed. One example here: https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/30/politics/boeing-sensor-737-ma…