rubl
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
The wondering type
Posts: 23,494 
Likes: 8,851
|
Post by rubl on Mar 13, 2019 21:23:39 GMT 7
If memory serves me correct at the time of the Falklands conflict many problems were encountered by naval gunnery offices when their computers were down as said officers could not calculate target ranges and angles to enable them to shoot over the horizon. Also, problems were experienced in combat by pilots who could fly by wire but not the seat of their pants. As a result, old fashioned training schemes were resurrected as a result of those problems. Service personnel were retrained to think for themselves and manually operate weapon systems and fly aircraft as opposed to relying on modern electronics etc. Those older planes had the older possibilities. A 'newer' plane like the B-2 wouldn't fly without computers and the F-22 and F-35 fighters are simply too fast and too aerodynamically unstable to be able to fly by human touch only. Of course, the way things are going with drones air forces may rely on relaxing at home remote control or 'just' AI. Signal jamming would play havoc, but a spitfire wouldn't do the trick either. Modern times doesn't mean all problems solved. There still enough work left for us to do  |
|
rubl
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
The wondering type
Posts: 23,494
Likes: 8,851
|
Post by rubl on Mar 13, 2019 21:25:57 GMT 7
Unfortunately there would be a public outcry if a plane had to make a short stop again every few hours. There's a lot of technology in a plane which simply can't be controlled by a two or even four man crew.Of course, since Donny suggested it, may I reminded people I did have a few semesters of Aerodynamics while studying Mathematics in Delft. I think that qualifies me for a well paying job as pilot. Assuming we don't go back to older, less sophisticated planes. If you want the honest truth, if the public at large knew the truth, they wouldnt fly again, nothing more than flying guinea pigs. Of course, flying is safe statistically, but if a plane drops down it tends to be curtains for all. Still, remember, most people die in bed  |
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Mar 13, 2019 21:47:42 GMT 7
I remember years ago being introduced to a mathematical genius, a eff head with a degree as soutie and i used to refer to them, I asked him how many decimal places he went to and did he round up or round down, I handed him an a3 piece of paper and asked him to work out his effin algoriths manually, i then asked him what feeds your input, clueless, another idiot that worked in a effin box with no clue or input from those next door. This effin idiot couldnt do a thrust/rpm calcualtion, asked him if he had ever been in a hush house, whats that he asked. They tell me most people die in a car crash within a mile from home, I always park up a mile away and get a taxi home,  . |
|
siampolee
Detective
Alive alive O
Posts: 14,028
Likes: 8,859
|
Post by siampolee on Mar 14, 2019 6:44:10 GMT 7
A fine example of that which was considered obsolete at the time was and is the ''Fairey Swordfish,'' its performance was on a parallel with a snail, basically at the time it was an airborne snail, even seagulls could outpace it!! But by heavens its track record was and still is impressive. I had the delights of flying in one many years ago (1961 ish if memory is correct). You could run a bloody sight faster than it flew, but it certainly proved the adage, ''Slow but sure.'' The Fairey Swordfish was a biplane torpedo bomber designed by the Fairey Aviation Company. Originating in the early 1930s, the Swordfish, nicknamed "Stringbag", was operated by the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy, in addition to having been equipped by the Royal Air Force (RAF) alongside multiple overseas operators, including the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) and the Royal Netherlands Navy. It was initially operated primarily as a fleet attack aircraft. During its later years, the Swordfish became increasingly used as an anti-submarine and training platform. The type was in frontline service throughout the Second World War, but it was already considered obsolete at the outbreak of the conflict in 1939.
Nonetheless, the Swordfish achieved some spectacular successes during the war. Notable events included sinking one battleship and damaging two others of the Regia Marina (the Italian Navy) during the Battle of Taranto, and the famous attack on the Bismarck, which contributed to her eventual demise. By the end of the war, the Swordfish held the distinction of having caused the destruction of a greater tonnage of Axis shipping than any other Allied aircraft. The Swordfish remained in front-line service until V-E Day, having outlived multiple aircraft that had been intended to replace it in service.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Swordfish
|
|
rubl
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
The wondering type
Posts: 23,494
Likes: 8,851
|
Post by rubl on Mar 14, 2019 8:50:27 GMT 7
Meanwhile the 737 MAC 8 is grounded worldwide. Note the latest version of the 737 series was specifically positioned as being fuel efficient a.o. The older models were a bit more thirsty.
|
|
me
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,342
Likes: 3,980
|
Post by me on Mar 14, 2019 12:23:35 GMT 7
Meanwhile the 737 MAC 8 is grounded worldwide. Note the latest version of the 737 series was specifically positioned as being fuel efficient a.o. The older models were a bit more thirsty. It is a nice plane if they can solve this. To be fair the only confirmed one with the automatic downward rotation without pilot control (though manual remedies have now been published and a software fix anounced for next month) is the Lion one. Ground reports of the Ethiopian one indicate strange noises and objects coming from the rear of the plane prior to the dive. This would be consistant with a cargo door opening or a bomb and not the trim issue. |
|
rubl
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
The wondering type
Posts: 23,494
Likes: 8,851
|
Post by rubl on Mar 14, 2019 12:32:50 GMT 7
Meanwhile the 737 MAC 8 is grounded worldwide. Note the latest version of the 737 series was specifically positioned as being fuel efficient a.o. The older models were a bit more thirsty. It is a nice plane if they can solve this. To be fair the only confirmed one with the automatic downward rotation without pilot control (though manual remedies have now been published and a software fix anounced for next month) is the Lion one. Ground reports of the Ethiopian one indicate strange noises and objects coming from the rear of the plane prior to the dive. This would be consistant with a cargo door opening or a bomb and not the trim issue. If I remember correctly it was also said the flight showed short stretches with very fast dives and some climbs. That could also explain 'things' falling off. With black boxes recovered and intact a lot should be clear soon although full details may not be made public for a while. Of course Boeing (and even competitors) will feel a lot of pressure to 'solve this problem'. I have no doubt that eventually because of all this planes will be safer, but 'eventually'. |
|
Mosha
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 5,654
Likes: 2,868
|
Post by Mosha on Mar 14, 2019 16:51:57 GMT 7
What do they say at the end of Air crash. Investigation? Making Flying safer, one crash at a time?
|
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Mar 14, 2019 20:07:33 GMT 7
What do they say at the end of Air crash. Investigation? Making Flying safer, one crash at a time? Each crash is part of the learning process. |
|
rott
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 3,698
Likes: 2,725
|
Post by rott on Mar 14, 2019 20:27:29 GMT 7
Are you just trying to cheer us up rgs?
|
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Mar 14, 2019 20:55:39 GMT 7
^^^ the faa should be reminded they are there for safety reasons not risk management etc etc.
I hope these bastids get hammered, remember the way the yanks got lawyers in and slammed bp.
The trouble with these companies, they fall under the too big to fail heading we witnessed 10 years back, too many suckers got their pensions tied up in them.
Vested interests, incestous relationships, nepotism etc etc, the whole thing effin stinks.
|
|
rubl
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
The wondering type
Posts: 23,494
Likes: 8,851
|
Post by rubl on Mar 14, 2019 21:11:33 GMT 7
^^^ the faa should be reminded they are there for safety reasons not risk management etc etc. I hope these bastids get hammered, remember the way the yanks got lawyers in and slammed bp. The trouble with these companies, they fall under the too big to fail heading we witnessed 10 years back, too many suckers got their pensions tied up in them. Vested interests, incestous relationships, nepotism etc etc, the whole thing effin stinks. What with 52% of the American National Budget going to the Pentagon (that's about 714,000,000,000 US$ in 2018/2019), I don't think we should worry too much about the financial state of Boeing. Mind you, ordinary working people in the civilian divisions may get hurt. That's as usual unfortunately. |
|
rubl
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
The wondering type
Posts: 23,494
Likes: 8,851
|
Post by rubl on Mar 16, 2019 10:15:52 GMT 7
Interesting side effect of the Trump 35 day government shutdown. Seems Boeing has been working on software 'improvements' ever since the Lion Air disaster last year (and maybe even before) but some of the paperwork was delayed as the FAA was 'grounded' for more than a month.
|
|
rubl
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
The wondering type
Posts: 23,494
Likes: 8,851
|
Post by rubl on Mar 16, 2019 13:13:11 GMT 7
Not a real high-tech explanation but may help. I'm surprised to see that the MAX8 isn't really much bigger than a regular 800. Still 21 more passengers can be cramped in and although the range has increased with 490 miles the cruising speed has dropped with 11% to 521mph. "How the Boeing 737 Max safety system differs from others" news.yahoo.com/boeing-737-max-safety-system-172934294.html |
|
rubl
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
The wondering type
Posts: 23,494
Likes: 8,851
|
Post by rubl on Apr 7, 2019 13:35:42 GMT 7
Seems a matter of 'single point of failure'. Mind you, in a way a software problem as it seems two sensors are available but only one is used. Finer details not really forthcoming, probably because of lawsuits. "Boeing's 'single point failure': Why was there no backup system on 737 Max jet? When it comes to safety, modern commercial aircraft are known not only for having back-up systems, but in some cases, back-ups of their back-ups. So even as Boeing has taken responsibility for a fatal flaw in a key anti-stalling system in its 737 Max 8, mystery still surrounds why the software was designed to be dependent on a single outside sensor, though it was equipped with two, triggering a chain of events that led to the crashes of Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines jetliners less than five months apart." www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/boeings-single-point-failure-why-was-there-no-backup-system-on-737-max-jet/ar-BBVGj06?li=BBnbcA1 |
|
.
