Remember me
▼ Content

Lion Air 737 Max 8 Crash



Page 2 of 2<12
27-10-2019 21:30
keepit
★★★☆☆
(694)
The whole thing seems to be a "new wine into old wineskins". I may be being unfair here though.
27-10-2019 21:30
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
GasGuzzler wrote:
keepit wrote:
Some regulations do seem to restrict air travel, especially in general aviation.
One of the serious motivations is to reduce the risk of midair collisions.

Here's a snapshot of all the planes in the air over the US right now. Flight controllers obviously have a very good handle on things. I don't believe mid air collisions were any consideration in engine retrofit decisions.


Most of these aircraft are not under any kind of air traffic control.

The engine retrofit was not caused by regulations.


The Parrot Killer
27-10-2019 21:32
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
keepit wrote:
Bill Gates is on Bloomberg TV right now talking about climate change.
The moderator asked him why some people doubt climate change and he answered, "Well, I don't know, maybe they didn't take enough science classes in school".


Define 'climate change'.

No science to see here...move along...move along...


The Parrot Killer
27-10-2019 21:33
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
keepit wrote:
The motivation to reduce midair collisions was directed toward reducing general aviation traffic.


There is no regulation restricting general aviation traffic.


The Parrot Killer
27-10-2019 21:34
keepit
★★★☆☆
(694)
The cost of aircraft fuel has gone way up which restricts general aviation. And therefore reduces the chances of midair collisions.
I remember when aviation fuel was 16 cents a gallon. Is it legitimate to blame that increase in price on the government?
After all, don't you blame govt regulation on increased prices of things?
Edited on 27-10-2019 21:37
27-10-2019 21:51
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1467)
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
keepit wrote:
Some regulations do seem to restrict air travel, especially in general aviation.
One of the serious motivations is to reduce the risk of midair collisions.

Here's a snapshot of all the planes in the air over the US right now. Flight controllers obviously have a very good handle on things. I don't believe mid air collisions were any consideration in engine retrofit decisions.


Most of these aircraft are not under any kind of air traffic control.


What??!!

If we depart Miami via commercial jet service to Chicago, who chooses altitude? Heading? Airspeed?

Is each pilot responsible to avoid other aircraft?

How DO they avoid mid air collisions?


spot-
Into the Night is also has delusions of comptance
27-10-2019 21:52
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote: The new software now uses both sensors, and shuts off the trim system if there is a difference. Further, it will also tell the pilot what it did on his ECAS display AND flash a separate warning light (that was before optional, but is now required).

So if the 2 sensors are not reporting the same value, it will shut off the auto system? Correct?

Correct. You have it exactly.
GasGuzzler wrote:
How difficult is it to fly manually without this system?

It's a pain, and damned inconvenient, but any aircraft, even a 737, can be flown manually. Things happen fast in jet aircraft like this, but any pilot reasonable experience of instrument flight can certainly handle it.
GasGuzzler wrote:
We are just talking about pitch, or angle of attack, correct? Just a little muscle?
Pitch is not angle of attack. Pitch is the angle of the aircraft relative to the ground. Angle of attack is the angle of the aircraft relative to the air striking the wing. You can be pointing almost straight up and have a low angle of attack (fighters do this...it's quite a ride!). You can have the nose pointed quite a ways down and have a high angle of attack.

Angle of attack is affected by the airspeed, and the effective loading on the wing. For example, a wing loaded to 2000lbs in level flight would experience an effective load of 4000lbs if you turn the aircraft in level flight a bank angle of just 30 deg. You feel heavier. The wing must carry that additional load.

Just like you get thrown to one side in a corner while in a car. The only difference is that an aircraft must bank first, then 'lift' the airplane around the turn. If you drove your car at speed through a banked turn on a race track, you will feel heavier in just the same way.

All wings have an angle of attack that is positive. Up to about 20 deg, the airflow over the wing is relatively smooth. Plow the wing at a higher angle of attack, such as by slowing the wing down or placing a heavier effective load on it, and the airflow breaks away from the wing in turbulent swirls (like the difference between a piece of plywood edge on into the wind, and held vertically against the wind). In that case, the wing cannot hold up the weight of the aircraft anymore, it's not flying anymore, and it becomes like a rock (ok, a streamlined rock). It falls. This is the stall.

To correct the stall, get the wing back up to speed again, and get the excessive effective load off of it (get out of the turn!). In other words, stop hauling back on the stick.

Trim systems (when they screw up) can command pulling back on the stick to induce a stall. The correction is to shove the stick forward. You are fighting the bad trim setting at this point, and it requires continuous pressure to keep that stick forward, but that's it. Of course, you get tired after awhile. Fortunately, you have a handy copilot to give you a rest. You just take turns holding that pressure. Then land the airplane as soon as practical.

MCAS is a trim system.

GasGuzzler wrote:
How much skill?
[quote]GasGuzzler wrote:
Should simulator time be required for existing pilots to deal with a malfunction like this?



The Parrot Killer
27-10-2019 21:55
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
keepit wrote:
Engineering fuel savings is a legitimate endeavor. Someone is to blame for the execution of this endeavor (engineering mistakes), not the climatologists.


Is it? The only reason to save fuel like this is to satisfy the Church of Green and the Church of Global Warming.

The difference in fuel savings between these two engines is really quite small.

So long as the airline can fly and still make money, the fuel savings are not all that important.


The Parrot Killer
27-10-2019 22:04
keepit
★★★☆☆
(694)
Boeing and the airlines don't ignore a potential fuel
savings. They deal with it. and use it if possible.
27-10-2019 22:07
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1467)
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote: The new software now uses both sensors, and shuts off the trim system if there is a difference. Further, it will also tell the pilot what it did on his ECAS display AND flash a separate warning light (that was before optional, but is now required).

So if the 2 sensors are not reporting the same value, it will shut off the auto system? Correct?

Correct. You have it exactly.
GasGuzzler wrote:
How difficult is it to fly manually without this system?

It's a pain, and damned inconvenient, but any aircraft, even a 737, can be flown manually. Things happen fast in jet aircraft like this, but any pilot reasonable experience of instrument flight can certainly handle it.
GasGuzzler wrote:
We are just talking about pitch, or angle of attack, correct? Just a little muscle?
Pitch is not angle of attack. Pitch is the angle of the aircraft relative to the ground. Angle of attack is the angle of the aircraft relative to the air striking the wing. You can be pointing almost straight up and have a low angle of attack (fighters do this...it's quite a ride!). You can have the nose pointed quite a ways down and have a high angle of attack.

Angle of attack is affected by the airspeed, and the effective loading on the wing. For example, a wing loaded to 2000lbs in level flight would experience an effective load of 4000lbs if you turn the aircraft in level flight a bank angle of just 30 deg. You feel heavier. The wing must carry that additional load.

Just like you get thrown to one side in a corner while in a car. The only difference is that an aircraft must bank first, then 'lift' the airplane around the turn. If you drove your car at speed through a banked turn on a race track, you will feel heavier in just the same way.

All wings have an angle of attack that is positive. Up to about 20 deg, the airflow over the wing is relatively smooth. Plow the wing at a higher angle of attack, such as by slowing the wing down or placing a heavier effective load on it, and the airflow breaks away from the wing in turbulent swirls (like the difference between a piece of plywood edge on into the wind, and held vertically against the wind). In that case, the wing cannot hold up the weight of the aircraft anymore, it's not flying anymore, and it becomes like a rock (ok, a streamlined rock). It falls. This is the stall.

To correct the stall, get the wing back up to speed again, and get the excessive effective load off of it (get out of the turn!). In other words, stop hauling back on the stick.

Trim systems (when they screw up) can command pulling back on the stick to induce a stall. The correction is to shove the stick forward. You are fighting the bad trim setting at this point, and it requires continuous pressure to keep that stick forward, but that's it. Of course, you get tired after awhile. Fortunately, you have a handy copilot to give you a rest. You just take turns holding that pressure. Then land the airplane as soon as practical.

MCAS is a trim system.

I think I'm getting it, thanks. I entirely misunderstood stall. I thought it had to do with too high of a rate of climb....is that also considered stall, or is that entirely different?


spot-
Into the Night is also has delusions of comptance
Edited on 27-10-2019 22:46
27-10-2019 23:27
keepit
★★★☆☆
(694)
Bill Gates was talking about his program to vaccinate young children and his program to improve their nutrition. He said that since the program began the number of deaths in 5 yr olds and younger has decreased from 10 million per year to 5 million/year.
How awesome would it feel to save 5 million children's lives per year?
28-10-2019 01:08
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5011)
GasGuzzler wrote: I think I'm getting it, thanks. I entirely misunderstood stall. I thought it had to do with too high of a rate of climb....is that also considered stall, or is that entirely different?

As the pitch increases (as happens with ascent) the force of lift (vertical force upward) generated by the wings decreases.

A stall is simply when the vertical force of lift is insufficient to support the weight of the aircraft, causing it to "drop" (as opposed to the pilot decreasing the lift in order to descend in a controlled manner).

An aircraft can stall simply by not having sufficient airspeed for the wings to generate sufficient lift. If you were to take pilot lessons part of your training would be to climb to a good altitude where you will slowly reduce your airspeed until the "stall" alarm sounds and then you start to drop ... so you get a "feel" for it. Then you'd do it while you're in a climb so you get a feel for that, etc...


GasGuzzler adroitly snagged spot's quote before IBDaMann could:
spot-
Into the Night is also has delusions of comptance

Good catch. I wasn't quick enough. I don't have one from spot so I should have been quicker.

Actually, that one isn't my kind of quote but I am claiming first dibs on the next one.

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
Edited on 28-10-2019 01:21
28-10-2019 01:20
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5011)
IBdaMann wrote:As the pitch increases (as happens with ascent) the force of lift (vertical force upward) generated by the wings decreases.

OK, I need to clarify something. There are two components to vertical lift.

1) lift generated from the angle of attack PLUS
2) Trigonometry: the cosine of the wing's pitch angle multiplied by the force generated by the airflow

Why am I bothering mentioning this?

An aircraft can climb/ascend by increasing pitch (pointing more upward) which, yes, reduces the amount of vertical airflow lift but increases the lift from the angle of attack.

At a certain pitch, the lift generated from the angle of attack begins to decrease along with the lift generated from the airflow. Pitch upward too much and the aircraft will stall.



.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
28-10-2019 01:52
keepit
★★★☆☆
(694)
IBDM,
I think if you increase power enough, the vertical lift can stay the same while lift from AOA will increase or decrease depending on AOA. The AOA can stay the same but the a/c will ascend just because that is the direction of thrust.
28-10-2019 03:48
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5011)
keepit wrote:
IBDM,
I think if you increase power enough, the vertical lift can stay the same while lift from AOA will increase or decrease depending on AOA. The AOA can stay the same but the a/c will ascend just because that is the direction of thrust.

Yes. I neglected the third component of lift coming from the engines. That was one of the differences between the old engines and the new ones. You are correct that this will, in turn, increase the lift generated from the angle of attack.

Yes, when a pilot wishes to climb, thrust is normally increased.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
28-10-2019 03:57
keepit
★★★☆☆
(694)
IBDM,
In this case the maintaining of lift would be because increasing power would maintain airspeed.
28-10-2019 05:06
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5011)
keepit wrote: IBDM,In this case the maintaining of lift would be because increasing power would maintain airspeed.

Sure.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
28-10-2019 05:35
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5011)
Into the Night wrote:The MCAS system was developed, the new engine designed, and the crashes occurred BEFORE the Green New Deal.

Yes, that's why I wrote "like it was part of the Green New Deal." I should have appended "in advance."


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
28-10-2019 09:20
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1459)
keepit wrote:
The cost of aircraft fuel has gone way up which restricts general aviation. And therefore reduces the chances of midair collisions.
I remember when aviation fuel was 16 cents a gallon. Is it legitimate to blame that increase in price on the government?
After all, don't you blame govt regulation on increased prices of things?


Everything has value, price is set by how much people are willing to spend, to obtain that item of value to them. The airline can make money, if they have no fuel to fly, so the fuel is of greater value. They can always share the cost of fuel with their customers. If ticket prices are too high, not as many people fly, airlines buy less fuel. Gas company doesn't make money sitting on their product, and will lower the price.

Unfortunately, the government wants to get in on the profits, and applies taxes, fees, regulations, and anything else they can think of to squeeze a few more dollars out of everyone's pocket. Those costs are shifted over to the customer, but if ticket prices are too high, fewer people fly. The airline can only reduce prices so much, before it's cutting into profit too deep, and operating costs. So, they file for bankruptcy, and the taxpayers get to pay to bail them out.
28-10-2019 16:40
James___
★★★★☆
(1691)
The FAA shut down the Florida company that made the faulty sensor that caused the Lion Air crash. From the Seattle Times;

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-shuts-down-revokes-certificate-of-florida-repair-firm-that-supplied-faulty-lion-air-sensor/
28-10-2019 18:03
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
keepit wrote:
Boeing and the airlines don't ignore a potential fuel
savings. They deal with it. and use it if possible.


It's not that big a fuel savings. It's to satisfy the market for the Church of Green.


The Parrot Killer
28-10-2019 18:12
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote: The new software now uses both sensors, and shuts off the trim system if there is a difference. Further, it will also tell the pilot what it did on his ECAS display AND flash a separate warning light (that was before optional, but is now required).

So if the 2 sensors are not reporting the same value, it will shut off the auto system? Correct?

Correct. You have it exactly.
GasGuzzler wrote:
How difficult is it to fly manually without this system?

It's a pain, and damned inconvenient, but any aircraft, even a 737, can be flown manually. Things happen fast in jet aircraft like this, but any pilot reasonable experience of instrument flight can certainly handle it.
GasGuzzler wrote:
We are just talking about pitch, or angle of attack, correct? Just a little muscle?
Pitch is not angle of attack. Pitch is the angle of the aircraft relative to the ground. Angle of attack is the angle of the aircraft relative to the air striking the wing. You can be pointing almost straight up and have a low angle of attack (fighters do this...it's quite a ride!). You can have the nose pointed quite a ways down and have a high angle of attack.

Angle of attack is affected by the airspeed, and the effective loading on the wing. For example, a wing loaded to 2000lbs in level flight would experience an effective load of 4000lbs if you turn the aircraft in level flight a bank angle of just 30 deg. You feel heavier. The wing must carry that additional load.

Just like you get thrown to one side in a corner while in a car. The only difference is that an aircraft must bank first, then 'lift' the airplane around the turn. If you drove your car at speed through a banked turn on a race track, you will feel heavier in just the same way.

All wings have an angle of attack that is positive. Up to about 20 deg, the airflow over the wing is relatively smooth. Plow the wing at a higher angle of attack, such as by slowing the wing down or placing a heavier effective load on it, and the airflow breaks away from the wing in turbulent swirls (like the difference between a piece of plywood edge on into the wind, and held vertically against the wind). In that case, the wing cannot hold up the weight of the aircraft anymore, it's not flying anymore, and it becomes like a rock (ok, a streamlined rock). It falls. This is the stall.

To correct the stall, get the wing back up to speed again, and get the excessive effective load off of it (get out of the turn!). In other words, stop hauling back on the stick.

Trim systems (when they screw up) can command pulling back on the stick to induce a stall. The correction is to shove the stick forward. You are fighting the bad trim setting at this point, and it requires continuous pressure to keep that stick forward, but that's it. Of course, you get tired after awhile. Fortunately, you have a handy copilot to give you a rest. You just take turns holding that pressure. Then land the airplane as soon as practical.

MCAS is a trim system.

I think I'm getting it, thanks. I entirely misunderstood stall. I thought it had to do with too high of a rate of climb....is that also considered stall, or is that entirely different?


It's different, but you have it partly correct.

To climb, an aircraft must slow down, just like a roller coaster does when going uphill. Even with those powerful engines, it still happens. Then an aircraft slows down, its angle of attack increases. The wing has to plow through the air more to squash enough of it down to keep the aircraft in the air at the slower speed.

You you try to climb steeper than the engines can do, the aircraft will slow down to the point of the angle of attack increasing to that 20 deg I spoke of. You stall. This is called a full power stall.

Again, the recovery is the same. Get the stick forward. Stop hauling back on it.

MCAS, being part of the trim system of the aircraft, can make it feel like you are not hauling the stick back when in fact you are. It can fool a pilot that is not paying attention.

Even worse, when coupled with the autopilot (another robot), as is typically done by most pilots during climb out, the autopilot is easily fooled by the trim system (it is, after all, just a robot!).

If the pilots aren't paying attention, the aircraft will stall. Foreign pilots are told never to disengage the autopilot if at all possible. They are put in a trap by their own training. The hesitation caused by this is long enough to crash. The plane is already at low altitude (it's climbing out at this stage) and there is no time to hesitate.

Once in cruise, MCAS is no longer active. It only runs during climb out.


The Parrot Killer
28-10-2019 18:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
IBdaMann wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:As the pitch increases (as happens with ascent) the force of lift (vertical force upward) generated by the wings decreases.

OK, I need to clarify something. There are two components to vertical lift.

1) lift generated from the angle of attack PLUS
2) Trigonometry: the cosine of the wing's pitch angle multiplied by the force generated by the airflow

Why am I bothering mentioning this?

An aircraft can climb/ascend by increasing pitch (pointing more upward) which, yes, reduces the amount of vertical airflow lift but increases the lift from the angle of attack.

At a certain pitch, the lift generated from the angle of attack begins to decrease along with the lift generated from the airflow. Pitch upward too much and the aircraft will stall.



.


It's actually simpler than that. If the aircraft is flying too slowly, it stalls. Angle of attack is directly related to the speed of the wing and the weight it must carry. No other factors affect it.

Tell a wing to fly too slowly (pulling back on the stick tells a wing to fly slower), it stalls.
The position of the stick is a wing speed control. That is all it does, consistently, every time, all the time.

If you are flying fast while straight and level, and you pull back on the stick, the wing slows down by climbing, just like a roller coaster. If you take the engine out of the equation for a minute (a glider), once at the speed you set with the stick, the wing no longer climbs. You fly straight and level at the new slower speed.

Engines make planes go up. Only the engines. The position of a control stick does not make a plane go up.


The Parrot Killer
28-10-2019 18:22
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
keepit wrote:
IBDM,
I think if you increase power enough, the vertical lift can stay the same while lift from AOA will increase or decrease depending on AOA. The AOA can stay the same but the a/c will ascend just because that is the direction of thrust.


If, and only if, the engines are powerful enough.

Airline engines are powerful, but not powerful enough to make the aircraft go straight up.

Some fighters can do that though.


The Parrot Killer
28-10-2019 18:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
James___ wrote:
The FAA shut down the Florida company that made the faulty sensor that caused the Lion Air crash. From the Seattle Times;

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-shuts-down-revokes-certificate-of-florida-repair-firm-that-supplied-faulty-lion-air-sensor/


They did not provide the sensor. They don't manufacture sensors. They are a repair shop. The Seattle Times, as usual, has it wrong again. If their repair certificate was indeed pulled, it may have been due to reasons completely unrelated to any sensor they repaired.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 28-10-2019 18:25
29-10-2019 17:01
keepit
★★★☆☆
(694)
The Boeing CEO is greeting grilled by congress as we speak.
29-10-2019 20:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
keepit wrote:
The Boeing CEO is greeting grilled by congress as we speak.

**** Congress. Someone should take their barbecue away. They've spent WAY too much time grilling people and not getting anything done.


The Parrot Killer
29-10-2019 21:36
keepit
★★★☆☆
(694)
*****Agreed.
29-10-2019 22:20
James___
★★★★☆
(1691)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
The FAA shut down the Florida company that made the faulty sensor that caused the Lion Air crash. From the Seattle Times;

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-shuts-down-revokes-certificate-of-florida-repair-firm-that-supplied-faulty-lion-air-sensor/


They did not provide the sensor. They don't manufacture sensors. They are a repair shop. The Seattle Times, as usual, has it wrong again. If their repair certificate was indeed pulled, it may have been due to reasons completely unrelated to any sensor they repaired.



The part is what's known as remanufactured. It's calibration being wrong isn't acceptable. You sound as ignorant as any American.
Since I live in the US, in Florida you either pick fruit or help retirees.
Edited on 29-10-2019 22:38
29-10-2019 23:34
James___
★★★★☆
(1691)
p.s., in Florida you can also work for Disney
30-10-2019 01:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
The FAA shut down the Florida company that made the faulty sensor that caused the Lion Air crash. From the Seattle Times;

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-shuts-down-revokes-certificate-of-florida-repair-firm-that-supplied-faulty-lion-air-sensor/


They did not provide the sensor. They don't manufacture sensors. They are a repair shop. The Seattle Times, as usual, has it wrong again. If their repair certificate was indeed pulled, it may have been due to reasons completely unrelated to any sensor they repaired.



The part is what's known as remanufactured.

They do not remanufacture that part.
James___ wrote:
It's calibration being wrong isn't acceptable.

There is no calibration.
James___ wrote:
You sound as ignorant as any American.

No, I design, build, fly, break, and fix airplanes.


The Parrot Killer
30-10-2019 01:23
James___
★★★★☆
(1691)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
The FAA shut down the Florida company that made the faulty sensor that caused the Lion Air crash. From the Seattle Times;

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-shuts-down-revokes-certificate-of-florida-repair-firm-that-supplied-faulty-lion-air-sensor/


They did not provide the sensor. They don't manufacture sensors. They are a repair shop. The Seattle Times, as usual, has it wrong again. If their repair certificate was indeed pulled, it may have been due to reasons completely unrelated to any sensor they repaired.



The part is what's known as remanufactured.

They do not remanufacture that part.
James___ wrote:
It's calibration being wrong isn't acceptable.

There is no calibration.
James___ wrote:
You sound as ignorant as any American.

No, I design, build, fly, break, and fix airplanes.


Do you know why Native Americans have problems? They trusted white people.
30-10-2019 01:25
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
The FAA shut down the Florida company that made the faulty sensor that caused the Lion Air crash. From the Seattle Times;

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-shuts-down-revokes-certificate-of-florida-repair-firm-that-supplied-faulty-lion-air-sensor/


They did not provide the sensor. They don't manufacture sensors. They are a repair shop. The Seattle Times, as usual, has it wrong again. If their repair certificate was indeed pulled, it may have been due to reasons completely unrelated to any sensor they repaired.



The part is what's known as remanufactured.

They do not remanufacture that part.
James___ wrote:
It's calibration being wrong isn't acceptable.

There is no calibration.
James___ wrote:
You sound as ignorant as any American.

No, I design, build, fly, break, and fix airplanes.


Do you know why Native Americans have problems? They trusted white people.

Non-sequitur fallacy. Racism.


The Parrot Killer
30-10-2019 01:39
James___
★★★★☆
(1691)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
The FAA shut down the Florida company that made the faulty sensor that caused the Lion Air crash. From the Seattle Times;

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-shuts-down-revokes-certificate-of-florida-repair-firm-that-supplied-faulty-lion-air-sensor/


They did not provide the sensor. They don't manufacture sensors. They are a repair shop. The Seattle Times, as usual, has it wrong again. If their repair certificate was indeed pulled, it may have been due to reasons completely unrelated to any sensor they repaired.



The part is what's known as remanufactured.

They do not remanufacture that part.
James___ wrote:
It's calibration being wrong isn't acceptable.

There is no calibration.
James___ wrote:
You sound as ignorant as any American.

No, I design, build, fly, break, and fix airplanes.


Do you know why Native Americans have problems? They trusted white people.

Non-sequitur fallacy. Racism.


ITN, this is sad. When it comes to Native Americans, white people can't be trusted. That's not racism. There is no Powhatan tribe today. Kind of why you don't like me. I'm white and I know what happened.
30-10-2019 08:50
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
The FAA shut down the Florida company that made the faulty sensor that caused the Lion Air crash. From the Seattle Times;

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-shuts-down-revokes-certificate-of-florida-repair-firm-that-supplied-faulty-lion-air-sensor/


They did not provide the sensor. They don't manufacture sensors. They are a repair shop. The Seattle Times, as usual, has it wrong again. If their repair certificate was indeed pulled, it may have been due to reasons completely unrelated to any sensor they repaired.



The part is what's known as remanufactured.

They do not remanufacture that part.
James___ wrote:
It's calibration being wrong isn't acceptable.

There is no calibration.
James___ wrote:
You sound as ignorant as any American.

No, I design, build, fly, break, and fix airplanes.


Do you know why Native Americans have problems? They trusted white people.

Non-sequitur fallacy. Racism.


ITN, this is sad. When it comes to Native Americans, white people can't be trusted. That's not racism. There is no Powhatan tribe today. Kind of why you don't like me. I'm white and I know what happened.

Non-sequitur fallacy. Racism.


The Parrot Killer
30-10-2019 18:29
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5011)
James___ wrote: Do you know why Native Americans have problems? They trusted white people.

How do you know they were white?

James___ wrote: When it comes to Native Americans, white people can't be trusted. That's not racism.

When it comes to white people, can native Americans be trusted?

James___ wrote:There is no Powhatan tribe today.

How do you know that they simply did not leave a forwarding address?


James___ wrote: Kind of why you don't like me. I'm white and I know what happened.

Hey, I like you. So you think it's because I don't believe you know what happened?

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
Page 2 of 2<12





Join the debate Lion Air 737 Max 8 Crash:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
I don't believe CO2 makes air hotter because I don't see any experimental proof509-10-2019 03:15
Max Planck and Pierre Prevost on Net Thermal Radiation and Net Heat3227-09-2019 02:43
If CO2 have higher temperature than O2 and N2 in the air?317-09-2019 00:37
Why cant we suck carbon out of the air?1226-08-2019 19:25
Alaska in desperate need, of air conditioners and sunscreen...1308-07-2019 05:20
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact