klink172

About

Username
klink172
Joined
Visits
8
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
34
Badges
0
Posts
15

Reactions

14Like4Informative

  • Boeing 737 Max pilots didn't have flight simulators, and trained on iPads instead

    klink172klink172
    SpamSandwich said:
    poisednoise said:
    Apart from the mention of iPads, I'm unclear why this has appeared here, but I'm utterly astonished if this is the case (it seems to exist as news currently only also on flightaware and a few other non-mainstream news sites).

    It seems the more we learn about this fiasco the more it would appear that there should be prosecutions brought against people who made these decisions at Boeing, quite possibly charges of manslaughter. I'm currently booked on a return flight on a 737-8 in July, and I really hope by that point the decision's been made that they all need to be scrapped and start again.
    There have been no instances of crashes in the US, so all signs point to pilots with a severe lack of training and experience so far.
    A specious conclusion. The aircraft experienced a false input into he MCAS which caused an control surface deflection the was not overridable.  Pilots here have submitted reports reports of anomalies with the system that, luckily, weren’t as catastrophic as the other two. 
    dysamoriacgWerksfastasleep

  • Boeing 737 Max pilots didn't have flight simulators, and trained on iPads instead

    klink172klink172
    There are times when training allows for self-schooling (paper/iPad) and times where ground school and/or sim is necessary.  Cost drives decisions and cost very much drove this decision.  Boeing was pressured by SWA to certify the MAX so that sim would be unecessary thereby eliminating those costs and keeping sim time available for other training. Sim time, btw, is a very in-demand resource. 

    With pressure from the airlines, Boeing pulled strings at the FAA to certify the MAX so that pilots could do self-schooling and qualify on the differences of the MAX. That schooling was highly deficient in what it covered. 

    Its one thing moving a person from a Honda CRX to an Accord - very easy and mostly intuitive. Try moving a person from a CRX to a Tesla with only a few minutes of explanation and you get a better idea of what Boeing did. 
    ravnorodomdysamoria

  • Boeing 737 Max pilots didn't have flight simulators, and trained on iPads instead

    klink172klink172
    DAalseth said:
    poisednoise said:
    Apart from the mention of iPads, I'm unclear why this has appeared here, but I'm utterly astonished if this is the case (it seems to exist as news currently only also on flightaware and a few other non-mainstream news sites).

    It seems the more we learn about this fiasco the more it would appear that there should be prosecutions brought against people who made these decisions at Boeing, quite possibly charges of manslaughter. I'm currently booked on a return flight on a 737-8 in July, and I really hope by that point the decision's been made that they all need to be scrapped and start again.
    It's the same airframe as before. Scrapping them would be stupid. But there does seem to be a problem with the systems they introduced with this model. Once that's sorted out, as it should have been in testing before certification, the plane will be fine. The question is how long will that take. The other question is, assuming this story to be true, is Boeing going to be open to civil and/or criminal actions. While the latter are possible, the former are nearly a certainty, if suits haven't already been filed.
    The flight characteristics are very different which is why Boeing had to add the MCAS. 

    I don’t see the concluding for months and Boeing, along with the FAA, are going to pay dearly. 
    cgWerks

  • Woman claims Apple Store lost her MacBook, later found

    klink172klink172
    Why is this even a story?
    mike1Dogpersonmacpluspluswatto_cobra

  • Lawsuit claims iPhone and other Apple devices infringe on wireless patents

    klink172klink172
    These entities file in districts that are friendly to their type of lawsuits. They’re stacking the deck in their favor by filing where they file. This court is, obviously, one of them.
    StrangeDayswatto_cobra

  • FCC retest vindicates Apple on iPhone RF exposure claims

    klink172klink172
    DAalseth said:
    MisterKit said:
    Maybe Apple would have a slander case against the newspaper. I would not take too kindly an article which was false and could lead to scarring my reputation and possibly resulting in lost income.
    Probably not against the newspaper. Freedom of speech and the press would likely quash that. But if someone brought the story to the paper’s attention I suppose Apple might be able to go after them. What I mean is if John Doe concocts the bogus tests for whatever reason (to get his name out as a researcher, to promote his lab, to lay groundwork for a suit against Apple, etc.,) and gives the story to the paper then he, rather than the paper, might be on the hook. But it would be hard to prove.
    The press has no freedom from slander. They never have. 
    watto_cobra