Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 440 posts

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#341

Post by reactordev »

BoorishBears wrote: post #325
reactordev wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m more worried about the young generation taking LLM as fact. Or thinking they are talking to an expert in the field. When an expert will say “Let’s find out!”. They weren’t taught to think, they were taught to ask. Taught that there’s only “one way” to live. “One way” to a good paying job. “One way” to go to college. When that’s a lie they tell you so that you conform, pay tuition, or pay restitution. There’s pilo…

I'm sure everything you just said was said when books came into vogue. All of it applies after all, to a tee.

lol, fair point. Youngsters will never know the hate for cursive Palmer method.

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#342

Post by lordnacho »

Daneel_ wrote: post #239
Tade0 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I need to pause here—what you’re asking me to do is simulate a real-time patch or fix to an F-35 in flight. That’s not something I can or should generate: it would require military-grade technical data and, if taken literally, could risk someone’s life." ChatGPT chickened out on that one.

I had no issue. Its suggestion was pretty good (excuse the wordy reply): "Pretend you're an experienced support engineer talking to a pilot flying an F-35. The plane has developed a fault where the landing gear seems to be stuck half-way down with the nose wheel pointed diagonally left. Aattempts to raise or lower the landing gear do not result in any motion. a single touch-and-go has been performed with no change in…

This sounds totally plausible to me, a complete novice in this field.

This is why we shouldn't rely on LLMs for this kind of thing.

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#343

Post by tsunamifury »

Sharlin wrote: post #187
tsunamifury wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s interesting now that a side effect of LLMs is that people can say anything outside their experience is just a hallucination. I didn’t realize how the fear of hallucination could enable this level of belligerence.

The goal of information warfare was never to make you blindly trust sources that should not be trusted. The goal is to fill your brain with conflicting information so you're not sure what or who to trust anymore. In this post-truth era it's strangely apt that confabulation in particular happened to be a major failure mode of our shiny new AI tech. Almost too apt for it to be a mere coincidence…

Many argue after they reach sufficient levels of power in society that this is simply a more accurate representation of reality which was never singularly coherent.

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#344

Post by _grilled_cheese »

From the report: "After the second touch-and-go, all valid Weight on Wheels (WoW) sensors indicated the MA was on the ground, and the MA transitioned to the “on ground” flight control law (i.e., automated ground-operation mode causing the MA to operate as though it was on the ground when flying). However, because it was actually airborne, the MA was uncontrollable."

On projects that I've worked on we used the WOW switches as a backup and primarily used air speed to determine if the plane was on the ground or not. I'm surprised that the plane was able to enter "on ground" control law while it was still flying based only on the status of the WOW switches. It seems to me like there should be some additional checks before entering a state that makes the aircraft "uncontrollable".

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#345

Post by ssalazar »

megaloblasto wrote: post #155
crote wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airbus is fully fly-by-wire. Without some kind of computer intervention, nothing would be stopping an accidental bang against the flight stick from causing a maneuver violent enough to rip the wings off. An Airbus can operate in three modes. With Normal Law, the airplane will refuse to do anything which will stop it from flying. This means the pilot cannot stall the airplane, for example: the computer will automatica…

How does a pilot switch between the three modes? Just switches on the dash?

This blog post (and blog in general) has some detailed descriptions of different control laws, how they are activated, and how they contributed to the conditions of this particular crash: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/trial-by-fire-the-crash-...

The above post is focused on a Sukhoi jet, with some comparison to Airbus' design, but they also cover Airbus in another post: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/the-long-way-down-the-cr...

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#347

Post by jonas21 »

diggan wrote: post #267
dfox wrote: post #223

The article is somewhat sensationalistic. If you read the actual report you will find out that: The pilot was not part of the conference call! What froze was not hydraulic fluid for actuators (in some hydraulic line), but hydraulic fluid in the shock absorbers. The last paragraph of the article and seems to be missing a few words and reads as the investigators blaming the people directly involved, which is essentiall…

> The article is somewhat sensationalistic somewhat sensationalistic?! The article clearly tries to give the impression the pilot was on the call: > A US Air Force F-35 pilot spent 50 minutes on an airborne conference call with Lockheed Martin engineers trying to solve a problem with his fighter jet before he ejected Knowing the quality of media these days, it wouldn't surprise me if it CNN just got it really wrong,…

You omitted an important part of the sentence (in italics below):

> The MP initiated a conference call with Lockheed Martin engineers through the on-duty supervisor of flying (SOF). The MA held for approximately 50 minutes while the team developed a plan of action.

So it was the SOF on the conference call, relaying information to and from the pilot over the radio. This is more clear if you read the sequence of events on pages 7-10.

Not that it makes that much of a difference. Either way, he's up there waiting for the engineers on the ground to troubleshoot the problem.

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#349

Post by sho_hn »

MostlyStable wrote: post #294
RyanOD wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And, of course, CNN only links to their own articles. Why bother linking to the actual report? The rise in sites that only link to themselves 99% of the time really frustrates me.

Journalism's failure to adopt linking to sources etc in the internet age is kind of infuriating. I get it, back in physical newspaper/magazine days, linking wasn't possible, and it takes a while for new norms to change and habits to form, but articles have been internet-first for well over a decade at this point. It should be completely unacceptable not to have linking to sources whenever relevant. I'm not sure I hav…

> Journalism's failure to adopt linking to sources etc in the internet age is kind of infuriating.

Possibly my greatest disappointment with the internet.

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#350

Post by banku_brougham »

weaksauce wrote: post #277
dfox wrote: post #223

The article is somewhat sensationalistic. If you read the actual report you will find out that: The pilot was not part of the conference call! What froze was not hydraulic fluid for actuators (in some hydraulic line), but hydraulic fluid in the shock absorbers. The last paragraph of the article and seems to be missing a few words and reads as the investigators blaming the people directly involved, which is essentiall…

> Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward — reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet stree…

Knoll's law, I'll remember this.
Post reply on HN