What If?
08-19-2019, 12:24 PM
#52
My Feedback: (6)
What if the FAA showed up?
Do you mean they would actually pull themselves out of the $1000 office chair and actually travel somewhere to do a little research?
Not when they've got a luncheon with Boeing reps about how to pass off the 737Max8 again.
We're dealing with bureaucrats. Expect nothing else.
Do you mean they would actually pull themselves out of the $1000 office chair and actually travel somewhere to do a little research?
Not when they've got a luncheon with Boeing reps about how to pass off the 737Max8 again.
We're dealing with bureaucrats. Expect nothing else.
08-19-2019, 01:09 PM
#53
My Feedback: (243)
Got a good chuckle out of that one jollyroger. However local FAA types in Central California are pretty field active and good folks to boot.Some time ago an out of town full scale pilot flew low over our field while departing a nearby uncontrolled airport. He later called the FAA complaining. When FAA guy asked him what the NOTAM said he tried to bluster his way out as he had not checked. End of discussion. FAA called our club president to notify of closed complaint, said not to worry. Our flying site has been at that location for 25+ years, city officials and airport manager grant us permission every new calendar year. FAA has known our location all that time as well.
Lastly all 37 club members have proper I.D.'s on their models so if FAA does drop by we are in full compliance.
Lastly all 37 club members have proper I.D.'s on their models so if FAA does drop by we are in full compliance.
08-21-2019, 04:22 AM
#55
What if the FAA showed up?
Do you mean they would actually pull themselves out of the $1000 office chair and actually travel somewhere to do a little research?
Not when they've got a luncheon with Boeing reps about how to pass off the 737Max8 again.
We're dealing with bureaucrats. Expect nothing else.
Do you mean they would actually pull themselves out of the $1000 office chair and actually travel somewhere to do a little research?
Not when they've got a luncheon with Boeing reps about how to pass off the 737Max8 again.
We're dealing with bureaucrats. Expect nothing else.
08-21-2019, 11:06 AM
#56
My Feedback: (243)
Boeing certainly erred with initial software and redundancy issues with the MCAS system but once discovered proved fixable. Complacency in both areas of design and within the cockpit created a willingness to rely too heavily on technology. Design arrogance disallowed redundancy of stall indicators feeding data to flight computers, deficient pilot training in overriding the MCAS system or simply turning it off (or pulling circuit breaker if available).
While Boeing and pilot training can fix the issues, politics are are playing a larger role in the continued grounding of the 737MAX8. Likely Airbus investors are pressuring the process in hopes of gaining sales via negative Boeing publicity. The FAA is a bureaucratic organization susceptible to influence, positive and negative.
The misunderstanding and misapplication of technology today feeds right into the dumbness and laziness of human beings. Witness self driving cars, Tesla's auto drive feature (with more auto makers planning) so one can sip coffee and read while zooming along at 80mph. Our own hobby technology precludes actually learning how things fly or drive. Just throw it into the air or drive it across a surface until it breaks then dump the broken pieces back onto the hobby shop or call tech support to say it doesn't work.
Technology is fun and wonderful when properly used. Unfortunately human beings usually muck up the works.
While Boeing and pilot training can fix the issues, politics are are playing a larger role in the continued grounding of the 737MAX8. Likely Airbus investors are pressuring the process in hopes of gaining sales via negative Boeing publicity. The FAA is a bureaucratic organization susceptible to influence, positive and negative.
The misunderstanding and misapplication of technology today feeds right into the dumbness and laziness of human beings. Witness self driving cars, Tesla's auto drive feature (with more auto makers planning) so one can sip coffee and read while zooming along at 80mph. Our own hobby technology precludes actually learning how things fly or drive. Just throw it into the air or drive it across a surface until it breaks then dump the broken pieces back onto the hobby shop or call tech support to say it doesn't work.
Technology is fun and wonderful when properly used. Unfortunately human beings usually muck up the works.
08-21-2019, 08:15 PM
#57
Boeing certainly erred with initial software and redundancy issues with the MCAS system but once discovered proved fixable. Complacency in both areas of design and within the cockpit created a willingness to rely too heavily on technology. Design arrogance disallowed redundancy of stall indicators feeding data to flight computers, deficient pilot training in overriding the MCAS system or simply turning it off (or pulling circuit breaker if available).
While Boeing and pilot training can fix the issues, politics are are playing a larger role in the continued grounding of the 737MAX8. Likely Airbus investors are pressuring the process in hopes of gaining sales via negative Boeing publicity. The FAA is a bureaucratic organization susceptible to influence, positive and negative.
The misunderstanding and misapplication of technology today feeds right into the dumbness and laziness of human beings. Witness self driving cars, Tesla's auto drive feature (with more auto makers planning) so one can sip coffee and read while zooming along at 80mph. Our own hobby technology precludes actually learning how things fly or drive. Just throw it into the air or drive it across a surface until it breaks then dump the broken pieces back onto the hobby shop or call tech support to say it doesn't work.
Technology is fun and wonderful when properly used. Unfortunately human beings usually muck up the works.
While Boeing and pilot training can fix the issues, politics are are playing a larger role in the continued grounding of the 737MAX8. Likely Airbus investors are pressuring the process in hopes of gaining sales via negative Boeing publicity. The FAA is a bureaucratic organization susceptible to influence, positive and negative.
The misunderstanding and misapplication of technology today feeds right into the dumbness and laziness of human beings. Witness self driving cars, Tesla's auto drive feature (with more auto makers planning) so one can sip coffee and read while zooming along at 80mph. Our own hobby technology precludes actually learning how things fly or drive. Just throw it into the air or drive it across a surface until it breaks then dump the broken pieces back onto the hobby shop or call tech support to say it doesn't work.
Technology is fun and wonderful when properly used. Unfortunately human beings usually muck up the works.
08-28-2019, 05:05 AM
#61
What if the FAA showed up?
Do you mean they would actually pull themselves out of the $1000 office chair and actually travel somewhere to do a little research?
Not when they've got a luncheon with Boeing reps about how to pass off the 737Max8 again.
We're dealing with bureaucrats. Expect nothing else.
Do you mean they would actually pull themselves out of the $1000 office chair and actually travel somewhere to do a little research?
Not when they've got a luncheon with Boeing reps about how to pass off the 737Max8 again.
We're dealing with bureaucrats. Expect nothing else.
08-28-2019, 06:19 PM
#63
