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

Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

flightradar24.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 421 posts

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#411

Post by dingosity »

mulmen wrote: post #268
dingosity wrote: post #161

Hmm. I thought all new Boeings flew out over the pacific so at the moment the customer signs the paperwork receiving the airplane, it was someplace where there would be no state or local sales tax. I'm not in the aero business myself, just repeating what I heard other, more knowledgable-sounding people said. Maybe that's not true or there's an exception for this one.

And I suppose Boeing put down $1.00 on the bill of sale? Give me a break. It's not a handshake deal on an El Camino. Give the IRS some credit here please. If this was feasible every bank and e-commerce site in the world would be hosted in international water.

The IRS does not collect state or local sales tax.

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#412

Post by dspillett »

yreg wrote: post #398
dspillett wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The popup is about any cookies, right? The popup is, yes. But the legislation they are pretending to be compliant with isn't. For basic session-level cookies that are essential to the operation of some sites, no legislation requires consent. The issues are third party tracking, long term use stalking, etc. But those that want to stalk you want you to believe that the legislation is against even session maintenance…

Unfortunately it's not always reasonably possible to convince the client / legal team that a cookie banner is not needed in such case and the decision makers would rather be sure than care about the UX. Or so I heard.

This is understandable, though it shows a lack of legal understanding which could be worrying from a legal team, as there was a lot of scare-mongering when cookie-and-other-tracking legislation was a significant talking point.

Also, largely due to the same anti-anti-tracking voices making spurious claims of what would happen, some put the warning up not because they think they need to, but to avoid having to argue that they don't need to if a complaint is made.

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#413

Post by yreg »

dspillett wrote: post #412
yreg wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately it's not always reasonably possible to convince the client / legal team that a cookie banner is not needed in such case and the decision makers would rather be sure than care about the UX. Or so I heard.

This is understandable, though it shows a lack of legal understanding which could be worrying from a legal team, as there was a lot of scare-mongering when cookie-and-other-tracking legislation was a significant talking point. Also, largely due to the same anti-anti-tracking voices making spurious claims of what would happen, some put the warning up not because they think they need to, but to avoid having to argue th…

It might be just them refusing to look into it and covering their asses, because they don't care if there is an unnecessary cookie banner.

But to be fair the stories I have heard were something along the lines of: a freelancer making a website for a local restaurant and being unable to convince the restaurant owner, because the owner's nephew said that the cookie banner must be there.

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#414

Post by bryanbraun »

blantonl wrote: post #89

This was almost certainly drawn out by hand, waypoints (lat/lon) and turns were plotted and then inputed into the flight management computer, and there is a good chance the plane just flew itself as told. Although given it was flown at such a lower altitude below 15k feed near Moses Lake (which is where Boeing does a ton of testing at that airport) it's possible the pilots hand flew this by following a pre-plotted ma…

Yeah, just look at how balanced the design looks. Either they programmed that flight path or the pilot spent a lot of time on an etch-a-sketch growing up.

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#416

Post by mulmen »

wkat4242 wrote: post #400
Armisael16 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 787 has a 330 minute ETOPS certification, so as long as it’s within 6.5 hours of an airport it can fly there. That’s almost everywhere on the planet except the South Pacific and Antarctica.

Aha ok, I didn't know that. I thought they had to remain within glide distance (and I think this was also the case in the beginning). I haven't flown intercontinentally for a very long time :) And most of it was in 747s.

Glide distance was never a consideration of ETOPS.

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#417

Post by fransje26 »

bigiain wrote: post #334
crazygringo wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think top management isn't part of this? Many times it's top management itself that makes sure these traditions continue. Maintaining company culture is something incredibly important to a lot of executives, at certain companies at least. And judging from the press, this was a highly coordinated event including thousands of spectators and John Travolta. [1] Top management can love having fun and maintainin…

> Why do you think top management isn't part of this? Many times it's top management itself that makes sure these traditions continue. Maintaining company culture is something incredibly important to a lot of executives, at certain companies at least. It sure as hell wasn't the "out source the 737 Max 8 avionics software to some low cost of living $8/hr contractors" beancounter management. Nor the "lets make the seco…

Or the let's-move-the-historical-headquarters-to-Chicago top management, so that the engineers wouldn't come and bother them.

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#418

Post by kortilla »

dheera wrote: post #113
kortilla wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any plane at 500mph is tissue paper if it hits something. If you haven’t seen the wing flex in a 737 or A320 you aren’t paying close enough attention. It’s very obvious during the takeoff roll as load is applied or during any moderate+ turbulence.

> Any plane at 500mph is tissue paper if it hits something. Sure, but a commercially-sold 1:500 plastic model of the same plane crashing into a wall at 1mph won't be tissue paper. Similarly, ants can lift 100 times their own weight and survive having 5000 times their own weight placed on top of them, but it's quite impossible to for a human-sized mammal to do the same.

You don’t fly in a 1:500 plastic model and the model isn’t built to scale for wall thickness. What’s your point?

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#419

Post by arendtio »

varenc wrote: post #287
aendruk wrote: post #139

Screenshot: https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/QmcjrYXR934QZqBuMHioRdcZEmo... On small displays this is otherwise obstructed by a cookie popup that offers only an “accept all” button. What’s even the point of the popup then?

> What’s even the point of the popup then? If you're in the EU you'll see a "Reject All" option. To confirm this, set a breakpoint in their JS, change your country to an EU one, and the option to "Reject All" cookies appears: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/09wcuy4yh3qqoaw/reject_a... Here's a screenshot of where I set the breakpoint and changed my country to France: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/ju41dpj14p…

Too bad I am from EU, but don't see the reject all button anyway...

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#420

Post by elproxy »

ekianjo wrote: post #243
alexose wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More cynically: Roughly 2.4 tons of fuel, equating to 16.8 tons of CO2 emissions.

Do you also track the CO2 consumption of all the guys who want to save the environment by going with private jets to Davos?

The only thing these people want to save is their class privilege, just so we're clear...
Post reply on HN