News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Case Against Boeing by WalterBright on Saturday November 16, 2019 @06:59AM (#21552219)
They used the column trim switches to override the trim and restored the trim setting to normal, per procedure. The next part of the procedure is to throw the cutoff switches, which they did not do.
Re:The Case Against Boeing by temac on Saturday November 16, 2019 @05:54PM (#21555465)
I'm sure you studied a lot of accident reports and analyses.

I'm sure you know the human factor plays a role in tons of cases.

What I don't quite understand is where you want to go from what you repeat again and again, pointing at supposed faults of the pilots, and then when more directly asked on the line if you are trying to diminish Boeing responsibility, you conveniently answers on the line of "of course not, I did not say there was no engineering problems".

So yeah, maybe pilots did not do a critical step in a critical phase of the plane doing utterly stupid things trying to kill everybody, because of various economics factor that have been debated to hell.

So... what?

You know Air France is a reputable company. You know that the pilots of AF 447 did some really weird things in the cockpit. That does not make the pitot tubes used at the time less defectives. And MAX trim (and the whole story around it) is way worse than that. I mean common, were you not once subject to a high stress situation that made you fuck one thing? And even if you were, can't you also not understand some people react differently and the human factor must be taken into account?

Re:The Case Against Boeing by nl on Saturday November 16, 2019 @07:16AM (#21552282)
If they do this 25 times, and still end up crashing is it possible that perhaps the procedure is a touch too complicated for a life and death situation?
Re:The Case Against Boeing by WalterBright on Saturday November 16, 2019 @07:23AM (#21552309)
How hard it is to turn off a switch right there on the center console so it is easily accessible?

(It's not like the pilot has to turn around and search for it.)

Re:The Case Against Boeing by simion314 on Saturday November 16, 2019 @01:32PM (#21554154)
This incident happened 2 times in a distance of a few months, if you would just use logic you can deduce that something is wrong , it is more probable that this 2 pilots forgot how to handle a standard procedure or that things are more complex then you are trying to imply, this could have been avoided if the pilots were informed about the new system and the warring lights would have been made default but doing this would have cost Boeing a lot of money
Re:The Case Against Boeing by jacquesm on Monday November 18, 2019 @03:19AM (#21562706)
Hey Walter,

I've been reading these comment threads with increasing amazement. I understand where you're coming from but if you really want to make the case that this system is faulty and that the pilots did something wrong at the same time you're doing a poor job of it by not taking into account the human angle: (1) there's 600 people dead; (2) HN'ers likely fly a lot and have little to no control over the systems on the planes that they fly with, but know all - or think they know all - about bad software and systems design; (3) The planes are still grounded pending investigation and fixes. Taken all those together I think you should take a dose of your own medication and not take such a strong position given that the facts aren't in yet.

Best case you manage to convince one or two people that there is more than one factor at play here, worst case people will associate you with Boeing in a way that helps neither. Finally, it is none of my business but ex-employees often hold stock in their former employer, if it should ever come out that you hold Boeing stock that would be held against you, so I really hope that is not the case.

Re:The Case Against Boeing by nl on Sunday November 17, 2019 @01:19AM (#21556786)
Clearly it was hard enough that they forgot, repeatedly.