Boeing 737 Max design error

Hello electronics design experts. I will never fly a 737 Max.
It is so flawed that board members at Boeing, like Caroline Kennedy and
Nikki Haley (Trump UN ambassador) should use their expertise to terminate
that death trap.

Electronics design sometimes used redundant sensors in case it is for
life support. Not Boeing. Kennedy and Haley approve of

Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the engine at the front of the wing. That makes it stall easily. Software cannot fix that
weights and balance mistake.

Boeing is updating its software so the giant engines can unbalance the
airplane the same way as in the two crashes. Do you want to fly a plane
that only software is used to prevent stalling? Without software it stalls.
With software it is low cost.
Nikki Haley is a Trump liar. Do not fly Trump-Boeing death traps. Don doesn't.

The Board at Boeing is packed with dunces and insurance agents who know nothing
about Weights and Balances of aircraft.

 

[Flyguy]

On Sunday, May 5, 2019 at 8:25:13 PM UTC-7, omni...@gmail.com wrote:

Hello electronics design experts. I will never fly a 737 Max.
It is so flawed that board members at Boeing, like Caroline Kennedy and
Nikki Haley (Trump UN ambassador) should use their expertise to terminate
that death trap.

Electronics design sometimes used redundant sensors in case it is for
life support. Not Boeing. Kennedy and Haley approve of

Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the engine at the front of the wing. That makes it stall easily. Software cannot fix that
weights and balance mistake.

Boeing is updating its software so the giant engines can unbalance the
airplane the same way as in the two crashes. Do you want to fly a plane
that only software is used to prevent stalling? Without software it stalls.
With software it is low cost.
Nikki Haley is a Trump liar. Do not fly Trump-Boeing death traps. Don doesn't.

The Board at Boeing is packed with dunces and insurance agents who know nothing
about Weights and Balances of aircraft.

Well, you should NEVER fly a 737 because you don't know what you are talking about. The weight & balance of the 737 Max IS NOT the issue, and never was. The issue has to do with MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System):
https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safety/what-is-the-boeing-737-max-maneuvering-characteristics-augmentation-system-mcas-jt610/
The MCAS as delivered was deeply flawed and has been fixed; the aircraft is now undergoing flight certification testing and will be back in service shortly.

 

[Banders]

On 05/05/2019 08:25 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the engine at the front of the wing. That makes it stall easily.

Actually, tail-heavy makes for an easy stall, and nose-heavy makes for a
dive. The crash planes weren't stalling, the AOA sensors just thought
they were. So you have it backward.

This photo should put your mind at ease.
<https://www.colombotelegraph.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Crash-Animation-of-Ethiopian-Airlines-flight-ET302-Boeing-737-Max-plane.jpg>

 

[bitrex]

On 5/6/19 12:19 AM, Flyguy wrote:

On Sunday, May 5, 2019 at 8:25:13 PM UTC-7, omni...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello electronics design experts. I will never fly a 737 Max.
It is so flawed that board members at Boeing, like Caroline Kennedy and
Nikki Haley (Trump UN ambassador) should use their expertise to terminate
that death trap.

Electronics design sometimes used redundant sensors in case it is for
life support. Not Boeing. Kennedy and Haley approve of

Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the engine at the front of the wing. That makes it stall easily. Software cannot fix that
weights and balance mistake.

Boeing is updating its software so the giant engines can unbalance the
airplane the same way as in the two crashes. Do you want to fly a plane
that only software is used to prevent stalling? Without software it stalls.
With software it is low cost.
Nikki Haley is a Trump liar. Do not fly Trump-Boeing death traps. Don doesn't.

The Board at Boeing is packed with dunces and insurance agents who know nothing
about Weights and Balances of aircraft.

Well, you should NEVER fly a 737 because you don't know what you are talking about. The weight & balance of the 737 Max IS NOT the issue, and never was. The issue has to do with MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System):
https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safety/what-is-the-boeing-737-max-maneuvering-characteristics-augmentation-system-mcas-jt610/
The MCAS as delivered was deeply flawed and has been fixed; the aircraft is now undergoing flight certification testing and will be back in service shortly.

500-something people dead and Boeing seems to just shrug it off like
they're Microsoft and they're gonna patch a bug in Windows 10 at the
next update. "Sorry, our bad."

500 dead people used to be the kind of thing executives tendered their
resignations over, and people get fired or go to prison over. Anyone at
Boeing going to do any time? Any execs on the gravy train going to take
the fall for this one? lol. They have a former exec as SoD, they're
untouchable and might as well be considered a branch of government at
this point, nothing gonna happen. Keep them checks rolling in, peasants,
hey sorry for murdering all those people with our shit software but at
least it didn't happen here.

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Sun, 5 May 2019 23:13:13 -0700) it happened Banders
<snap@mailchute.com> wrote in <qaoj9p$1jpn$1@gioia.aioe.org>:

On 05/05/2019 08:25 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the engine at the front of the wing. That makes it stall easily.
Actually, tail-heavy makes for an easy stall, and nose-heavy makes for a
dive. The crash planes weren't stalling, the AOA sensors just thought
they were. So you have it backward.

This photo should put your mind at ease.
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Crash-Animation-of-Ethiopian-Airlines-flight-ET302-Boeing-737-Max-pl
ane.jpg

Normally software is tested and debugged, crashes happen,
bit of a nono to debug it in flights that carry people.

My opinion is that such software should be written by pilots,
not by spaced out no flying experience people.

I have bluntly refused to write code for things that I could not use myself.

Boeing and Trump standing there 'selling' it when whe got elected...
Does anybody see the link?

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Mon, 6 May 2019 03:52:33 -0400) it happened bitrex
<user@example.net> wrote in <5JRzE.807474$Z%2.42896@fx48.iad>:

On 5/6/19 3:28 AM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 5 May 2019 23:13:13 -0700) it happened Banders
snap@mailchute.com> wrote in <qaoj9p$1jpn$1@gioia.aioe.org>:

On 05/05/2019 08:25 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the engine at the front of the wing. That makes it stall
easily.
Actually, tail-heavy makes for an easy stall, and nose-heavy makes for a
dive. The crash planes weren't stalling, the AOA sensors just thought
they were. So you have it backward.

This photo should put your mind at ease.

https://www.colombotelegraph.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Crash-Animation-of-Ethiopian-Airlines-flight-ET302-Boeing-737-Max-pl
ane.jpg

Normally software is tested and debugged, crashes happen,
bit of a nono to debug it in flights that carry people.

My opinion is that such software should be written by pilots,
not by spaced out no flying experience people.

I have bluntly refused to write code for things that I could not use myself.

Ever write the code for an artificially intelligent sex-robot that
replicates the sensation of making love to a barely-legal Asian college
student majoring in microbiology? Asking for a friend.

Interesting, yes, this is interesting too:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190502161207.htm
Should not be a problem, try on monkeys first ;-)
Anyways AI is your solution.

Boeing and Trump standing there 'selling' it when whe got elected...
Does anybody see the link?

Ah I got it. Trump is a sex-robot salesman from the future accidentally
stranded in our time. I knew it.

Like Trump University, normally somebody would get jailed for running a fake university and handing out fake certificates?
A Leader That Is A Fake and does not take things like reality and laws seriously,
will cause its minions to behave the same, and cut corners,
there is the cause and effect.

hell even CNN sings his praises these days.
NY times changed its wallstreet page to a useless piece of shit after he commanded it.
And US deficit is still growing.

In a world were machines and AI should now be doing all the work,
in the USA more and more people are forced to work!

He sells that as good!

I watched a move last night, 'passengers', recommended.

Warships heading to Iran, making trouble in Venezuela, bullying Germany and the EU,
and just now more tariffs on China.
Your capacitors will be more expensive, your PCBs too, your 5G will suck without Huawei,
Apple will go belly up due to no sales in China, a WW is on the horizon.

I was considering a project to beam up people to some satellite,
got some code for that?
LOL

 

bitrex <user@example.net> wrote in news:c1RzE.535275$cD4.504076
@fx43.iad:

500-something people dead and Boeing seems to just shrug it off like
they're Microsoft and they're gonna patch a bug in Windows 10 at the
next update. "Sorry, our bad."

You are so full of shit. You have no clue what they are doing with
the families of the victims, etc. And you are obviously also clueless
as to what they did to fix it.

You are the worst kind of speculator.

 

omnilobe@gmail.com wrote in
news:c53fb380-eaac-4408-9422-959a9d1f8d3f@googlegroups.com:

Boeing is updating its software so the giant engines can unbalance
the airplane the same way as in the two crashes. Do you want to
fly a plane that only software is used to prevent stalling?
Without software it stalls.

The software was for IF the plane stalled, which it did not. It was
a sensor error.

It is because the pilot does not always have a sense of a stall
situation, which the craft never get into anyway unless the pilot and
copilot are sleeping.

A stalling plane is pilot error, not airplane error.

The biggest issue to me is that there was no release switch to return
pilot control.

 

omnilobe@gmail.com wrote in
news:c53fb380-eaac-4408-9422-959a9d1f8d3f@googlegroups.com:

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the
engine at the front of the wing. That makes it stall easily.
Software cannot fix that weights and balance mistake.

The planes did not stall.

Your grasp of aeronautical engineering appears to rest near nil, as
does the credibility of your opinions.

"I looked at photos..."

Yeah, you're a real expert... not!

 

[bitrex]

On 5/6/19 3:28 AM, Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Sun, 5 May 2019 23:13:13 -0700) it happened Banders
snap@mailchute.com> wrote in <qaoj9p$1jpn$1@gioia.aioe.org>:

On 05/05/2019 08:25 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the engine at the front of the wing. That makes it stall easily.
Actually, tail-heavy makes for an easy stall, and nose-heavy makes for a
dive. The crash planes weren't stalling, the AOA sensors just thought
they were. So you have it backward.

This photo should put your mind at ease.
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Crash-Animation-of-Ethiopian-Airlines-flight-ET302-Boeing-737-Max-pl
ane.jpg

Normally software is tested and debugged, crashes happen,
bit of a nono to debug it in flights that carry people.

My opinion is that such software should be written by pilots,
not by spaced out no flying experience people.

I have bluntly refused to write code for things that I could not use myself.

Ever write the code for an artificially intelligent sex-robot that
replicates the sensation of making love to a barely-legal Asian college
student majoring in microbiology? Asking for a friend.

Boeing and Trump standing there 'selling' it when whe got elected...
Does anybody see the link?

Ah I got it. Trump is a sex-robot salesman from the future accidentally
stranded in our time. I knew it.

 

[Martin Brown]

On 06/05/2019 05:19, Flyguy wrote:

On Sunday, May 5, 2019 at 8:25:13 PM UTC-7, omni...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello electronics design experts. I will never fly a 737 Max. It is
so flawed that board members at Boeing, like Caroline Kennedy and
Nikki Haley (Trump UN ambassador) should use their expertise to
terminate that death trap.

Electronics design sometimes used redundant sensors in case it is
for life support. Not Boeing. Kennedy and Haley approve of

Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of the
engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the engine
at the front of the wing. That makes it stall easily. Software
cannot fix that weights and balance mistake.

Boeing is updating its software so the giant engines can unbalance
the airplane the same way as in the two crashes. Do you want to fly
a plane that only software is used to prevent stalling? Without
software it stalls. With software it is low cost. Nikki Haley is a
Trump liar. Do not fly Trump-Boeing death traps. Don doesn't.

The Board at Boeing is packed with dunces and insurance agents who
know nothing about Weights and Balances of aircraft.

Well, you should NEVER fly a 737 because you don't know what you are
talking about. The weight & balance of the 737 Max IS NOT the issue,
and never was. The issue has to do with MCAS (Maneuvering
Characteristics Augmentation System):
https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safety/what-is-the-boeing-737-max-maneuvering-characteristics-augmentation-system-mcas-jt610/

The MCAS as delivered was deeply flawed and has been fixed; the
aircraft is now undergoing flight certification testing and will be
back in service shortly.

MCAS was the software *BODGE* installed to allow marketing to pretend
that the 737 Max was just another 737 model despite it having perverse
handling characteristics resulting from the physically larger engines
and a shifted centre of gravity. MCAS was badly flawed but something was
necessary to prevent the plane from stalling if flown like a real 737.

MCAS as implemented would put the plane into a power dive to avoid
stalling if the AoA sensor went bad. A well trained aircrew might have
been able to counteract this although according to the last crash the
procedures do not work if take off is from a high altitude airport.

Heads must roll in the FAA who signed this off on the nod without
properly checking that Boeing engineers had done the job right!

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Mon, 6 May 2019 19:00:05 +1000) it happened Sylvia Else
<sylvia@email.invalid> wrote in <gjabcoF495jU1@mid.individual.net>:

The effect of the software behaviour, as was, was to trim the aircraft
forward for no good reason.

The pilots should have treated it as a runaway trim, and acted
accordingly. Then the crashes would not have occurred.

The system could not be turned off AFAIK.

It seems likely that Boeing expected that that would happen in the event
that this non-redundant computer system misbehaved.

Yet in both cases the pilots let the aircraft get itself seriously out
of trim. So much so, that in the case of the second crash, when the the
pilots did eventually disable the electric trim, the aircraft was so far
out of trim that the pilots were not strong enough to turn the trim
wheels (or they didn't try - it's rather unclear at the moment).

Have not read all the details, but it seemed they increased speed / engine thrust to prevent a stall.
What th3 stupid system should do it check for altitude and a lot more parameters before doing the fatal trim.

Where I live in the old days pilot training to get out of a stall was on a little 'Tiger Moth',
little bi-planes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Tiger_Moth
They used to do that next to our house, above the neighbors land .....
Training, yes, and it did not always go smooth.



>Serious questions need to be asked about the competence of the pilots.

No, that is Boeing PR shit.
That plane is a disaster, it is unstable by its nature.
Pilots were not even informed of that system.
Try reading a 'manual' (having severe deficiencies in it) in the 60 seconds or so you have before the crash.

Would a properly trained crew have had any difficulties, even in the
absence of details about MCAS? I rather think not.

A properly trained crew would have a pair of cutters to cut the wires to the thing before takeoff.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 06/05/19 10:00, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 6/05/2019 1:25 pm, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
Hello electronics design experts. I will never fly a 737 Max.
It is so flawed that board members at Boeing, like Caroline Kennedy and
Nikki Haley (Trump UN ambassador) should use their expertise to terminate
that death trap.

Electronics design sometimes used redundant sensors in case it is for
life support. Not Boeing. Kennedy and Haley approve of

Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the engine at the
front of the wing. That makes it stall easily. Software cannot fix that
weights and balance mistake.

Boeing is updating its software so the giant engines can unbalance the
airplane the same way as in the two crashes. Do you want to fly a plane
that only software is used to prevent stalling? Without software it stalls.
With software it is low cost.
Nikki Haley is a Trump liar. Do not fly Trump-Boeing death traps. Don doesn't.

The Board at Boeing is packed with dunces and insurance agents who know nothing
about Weights and Balances of aircraft.


The effect of the software behaviour, as was, was to trim the aircraft forward
for no good reason.

The MCAS software commanded a dive for a very *good* reason:
the AoA was dangerously high. Or so it was being told by a
faulty sensor.

The pilots should have treated it as a runaway trim, and acted accordingly. Then
the crashes would not have occurred.

They were overridden by the MCAS.

Disabling the MCAS wasn't trivial. Normally manually
operating the controls will disable the autopilot and
give control back to the pilots. But MCAS wasn't part
of the autopilot and was designed to prevent that.

Don't forget that the *purpose* of MCAS was to *pretend*
nothing had changed, i.e. pretend that MCAS didn't exist!

It seems likely that Boeing expected that that would happen in the event that
this non-redundant computer system misbehaved.

Yet in both cases the pilots let the aircraft get itself seriously out of trim.
So much so, that in the case of the second crash, when the the pilots did
eventually disable the electric trim, the aircraft was so far out of trim that
the pilots were not strong enough to turn the trim wheels (or they didn't try -
it's rather unclear at the moment).

It was far more than "trim".

Serious questions need to be asked about the competence of the pilots. Would a
properly trained crew have had any difficulties, even in the absence of details
about MCAS? I rather think not.

Hiding behind "properly trained" is frequently an
inadequate figleaf. That's definitely the case here,
since the the whole purpose of MCAS is, *very explicitly*,
to *avoid* having to retrain pilots!

For a long time Boeing has trumpeted that they allow
their pilots full autonomy, unlike the Airbus fly-by-wire
system. MCAS is a complete change in that philosophy.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 6/05/2019 1:25 pm, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

Hello electronics design experts. I will never fly a 737 Max.
It is so flawed that board members at Boeing, like Caroline Kennedy and
Nikki Haley (Trump UN ambassador) should use their expertise to terminate
that death trap.

Electronics design sometimes used redundant sensors in case it is for
life support. Not Boeing. Kennedy and Haley approve of

Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the engine at the front of the wing. That makes it stall easily. Software cannot fix that
weights and balance mistake.

Boeing is updating its software so the giant engines can unbalance the
airplane the same way as in the two crashes. Do you want to fly a plane
that only software is used to prevent stalling? Without software it stalls.
With software it is low cost.
Nikki Haley is a Trump liar. Do not fly Trump-Boeing death traps. Don doesn't.

The Board at Boeing is packed with dunces and insurance agents who know nothing
about Weights and Balances of aircraft.

The effect of the software behaviour, as was, was to trim the aircraft
forward for no good reason.

The pilots should have treated it as a runaway trim, and acted
accordingly. Then the crashes would not have occurred.

It seems likely that Boeing expected that that would happen in the event
that this non-redundant computer system misbehaved.

Yet in both cases the pilots let the aircraft get itself seriously out
of trim. So much so, that in the case of the second crash, when the the
pilots did eventually disable the electric trim, the aircraft was so far
out of trim that the pilots were not strong enough to turn the trim
wheels (or they didn't try - it's rather unclear at the moment).

Serious questions need to be asked about the competence of the pilots.
Would a properly trained crew have had any difficulties, even in the
absence of details about MCAS? I rather think not.

Sylvia.

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Mon, 06 May 2019 08:30:50 +0000, Jan Panteltje wrote:

Like Trump University, normally somebody would get jailed for running a
fake university and handing out fake certificates?

Dunno about that, but I *do* know Obama posted a crudely-forged birth
certificate on the WH website, so maybe Trump is simply following a
recently-established precedent. :-D



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Sun, 05 May 2019 20:25:09 -0700, omnilobe wrote:

Do you want to fly a plane
that only software is used to prevent stalling?

It wouldn't worry me unless it came from Microsoft.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 6/05/2019 7:37 pm, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 06/05/19 10:00, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 6/05/2019 1:25 pm, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
Hello electronics design experts. I will never fly a 737 Max.
It is so flawed that board members at Boeing, like Caroline Kennedy and
Nikki Haley (Trump UN ambassador) should use their expertise to
terminate
that death trap.

Electronics design sometimes used redundant sensors in case it is for
life support. Not Boeing. Kennedy and Haley approve of

Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the
engine at the front of the wing. That makes it stall easily. Software
cannot fix that
weights and balance mistake.

Boeing is updating its software so the giant engines can unbalance the
airplane the same way as in the two crashes. Do you want to fly a plane
that only software is used to prevent stalling? Without software it
stalls.
With software it is low cost.
Nikki Haley is a Trump liar. Do not fly Trump-Boeing death traps. Don
doesn't.

The Board at Boeing is packed with dunces and insurance agents who
know nothing
about Weights and Balances of aircraft.


The effect of the software behaviour, as was, was to trim the aircraft
forward for no good reason.

The MCAS software commanded a dive for a very *good* reason:
the AoA was dangerously high. Or so it was being told by a
faulty sensor.


The pilots should have treated it as a runaway trim, and acted
accordingly. Then the crashes would not have occurred.

They were overridden by the MCAS.

The procedure for a runaway trim involves tripping two switches that
disconnect the electric trim. It prevents the MCAS, or anything else,
from moving the trim electrically.

In the Ethopian crash, they did trip those switches, and it did prevent
the MCAS from doing anything, but they also couldn't, or didn't, rotate
the trim wheels manually to get the aircraft back into trim. They then,
unaccountably, tripped the switches again, reenabling the electric trim,
and in the process letting the MCAS make the situation even worse.

Sylvia.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 6/05/2019 7:37 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Mon, 6 May 2019 19:00:05 +1000) it happened Sylvia Else
sylvia@email.invalid> wrote in <gjabcoF495jU1@mid.individual.net>:

The effect of the software behaviour, as was, was to trim the aircraft
forward for no good reason.

The pilots should have treated it as a runaway trim, and acted
accordingly. Then the crashes would not have occurred.

The system could not be turned off AFAIK.


It seems likely that Boeing expected that that would happen in the event
that this non-redundant computer system misbehaved.

Yet in both cases the pilots let the aircraft get itself seriously out
of trim. So much so, that in the case of the second crash, when the the
pilots did eventually disable the electric trim, the aircraft was so far
out of trim that the pilots were not strong enough to turn the trim
wheels (or they didn't try - it's rather unclear at the moment).


Have not read all the details, but it seemed they increased speed / engine thrust to prevent a stall.
What th3 stupid system should do it check for altitude and a lot more parameters before doing the fatal trim.

They were in no danger of stalling, but the increased engine thrust will
induce a pitch up, or at least reduce the pitch down, and that may have
been their intent.

Where I live in the old days pilot training to get out of a stall was on a little 'Tiger Moth',
little bi-planes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Tiger_Moth
They used to do that next to our house, above the neighbors land .....
Training, yes, and it did not always go smooth.



Serious questions need to be asked about the competence of the pilots.

No, that is Boeing PR shit.

It was my own conclusion, with no input from Boeing.

That plane is a disaster, it is unstable by its nature.
Pilots were not even informed of that system.
Try reading a 'manual' (having severe deficiencies in it) in the 60 seconds or so you have before the crash.

The runaway trim procedure is a memory item. They're supposed to be able
to action it without reference to the handbook.

Sylvia.

 

On Monday, May 6, 2019 at 4:57:15 AM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Mon, 06 May 2019 08:30:50 +0000, Jan Panteltje wrote:

Like Trump University, normally somebody would get jailed for running a
fake university and handing out fake certificates?

Dunno about that, but I *do* know Obama posted a crudely-forged birth
certificate on the WH website, so maybe Trump is simply following a
recently-established precedent. :-D

The birther movement is still alive. And then you wonder why some people
say birthers are racist.

 

On Monday, May 6, 2019 at 4:30:57 AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Mon, 6 May 2019 03:52:33 -0400) it happened bitrex
user@example.net> wrote in <5JRzE.807474$Z%2.42896@fx48.iad>:

On 5/6/19 3:28 AM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 5 May 2019 23:13:13 -0700) it happened Banders
snap@mailchute.com> wrote in <qaoj9p$1jpn$1@gioia.aioe.org>:

On 05/05/2019 08:25 PM, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
Weight and Balance of the 737 Max.

I looked at photos of 737 and 737 Max. The 737 has the front of
the engine at the front of the wing. The Max has the rear of the engine at the front of the wing. That makes it stall
easily.
Actually, tail-heavy makes for an easy stall, and nose-heavy makes for a
dive. The crash planes weren't stalling, the AOA sensors just thought
they were. So you have it backward.

This photo should put your mind at ease.

https://www.colombotelegraph.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Crash-Animation-of-Ethiopian-Airlines-flight-ET302-Boeing-737-Max-pl
ane.jpg

Normally software is tested and debugged, crashes happen,
bit of a nono to debug it in flights that carry people.

My opinion is that such software should be written by pilots,
not by spaced out no flying experience people.

I have bluntly refused to write code for things that I could not use myself.

Ever write the code for an artificially intelligent sex-robot that
replicates the sensation of making love to a barely-legal Asian college
student majoring in microbiology? Asking for a friend.

Interesting, yes, this is interesting too:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190502161207.htm
Should not be a problem, try on monkeys first ;-)
Anyways AI is your solution.



Boeing and Trump standing there 'selling' it when whe got elected...
Does anybody see the link?

Ah I got it. Trump is a sex-robot salesman from the future accidentally
stranded in our time. I knew it.

Like Trump University, normally somebody would get jailed for running a fake university and handing out fake certificates?

While there certainly was some shystering involved in calling it a university,
Trump didn't hand out fake certificates, he never claimed it was an accredited,
real university, he wasn't handing out BA, BS diplomas. You'd have to be
a real grade A moron to thing a few real estate seminars could be a
university degree.

A Leader That Is A Fake and does not take things like reality and laws seriously,
will cause its minions to behave the same, and cut corners,
there is the cause and effect.

Except of course that the 737 Max and MCAS had been developed before
Trump took office. But I agree he is a corrosive effect and like you
say, if he can lie and cheat, then why not everyone else? One of his
worst moments was when he saluted Manafort, who had just been convicted
of among other things, of hiding laundering and failing to pay income
tax on $30 mil. He said it was awful what "they" did to him and that
he respects him for being strong and refusing to cooperate with the
Justice Dept. That was a very, very low point for our country.

hell even CNN sings his praises these days.
NY times changed its wallstreet page to a useless piece of shit after he commanded it.
And US deficit is still growing.

When's the last time you heard Trump even use the words deficit or national
debt? They were only a big issue when they were under Obama, now that
they are his, not a word. In fact, he just had another meeting for a
"solution" to a problem. He had Schumer and Pelosi over the the WH and
they reached "agreement" to spend $2 tril on infrastructure. The WH
admits there was no preparation, no analysis, just Trump winging it.
Notably absent was any discussion about how to PAY for it. So, we all
know where this "solution" is headed, it was all Kabuki theater.