***Official Political Discussion Thread***

I think you mean that MCAS previously used one sensor as opposed to two in the latest version that will be available later this year. I don't think one sensor being used was cutting corners, it would be better classified as a lack of understanding by parties within Boeing and the FAA. Similar to Boeing, the FAA's understanding that the software change was at worst benign. Letting Boeing do the validation aside, I think what you have issue with is the type certification process which allowed Boeing to certify the MAX as an amendment to the certification of an airplane that was built built in 1964. The only "significant" difference from the previous versions and this is the new engines which changed the aerodynamics. This is the reason MCAS was created in the first place because per Type Cert requirements the new plane must handle the same as the same as the original plane. All other changes were not deemed significant enough to warrant an entirely new certification.

In the case of the singular sensor for the MCAS, the lack of redundancy is a design no no because the failure of the sensor has a direct impact on the safety of the entire plane. I can't think of a machine destined for public use that has been certified without a redundant safety system. Two sensors should have been standard from the get-go.

Then, there is the lack of communication between the machine and the operator - pilot - when something goes wrong (the warning light that would signal when the two sensors - if available - disagreed was optional), which increases the risk of the pilot not knowing what is happening when an error occurs and how to address it. Should have been standard from the get-go.

Finally, we have pilots who don't fully understand a feature that was fundamental in helping them operate the plane (if we go by the reports made by those who flew the 737 max), which indicates that the amount of training recommended by Boeing was insufficient.

From a validation perspective, any change made to a certified equipment triggers a need for re-validating the equipment. In some industries, you can't even move a machine a few centimeters from its validated position without triggering the need for a whole bunch of paperwork and tests. The level of scrutiny varies depending on the impact of the changes, so not everything gets examined if there is no need to.

What I do not understand is how, given the upgrades made to the original design (which had a severe impact on the design of the plane), nobody at Boeing thought about how these changes would affect the overall safety of the 737 max. After all, if you change the aerodynamics of the plane, you are changing the way the plane was originally meant to fly (which means that you are creating a new plane). To me, it seems likely that some liberties were taken because Boeing had control of the re-certification process. The 737 max didn't fly like the old 737, but Boeing had the ability to manipulate the paperwork to make it look like it did. That's were I see the systemic failure.
 
of course not
a nurse made it in 2 weeks
and why would i be trippin
u apparently dont know how much nurses make
From our jobs union website
U can view our wages for different positions
Now imagine once overtime hits after their 8th hr or
or double time after their 12th hr
And OT after 40 hrs and 6th day
And double time on their 7th straight day
4A5D6CEF-7E99-4047-94E9-6268BF01C9E5.jpeg

damn man, nurses make around 40 here I think. Although it’s cheaper but still that’s good money.
 
What I do not understand is how, given the upgrades made to the original design (which had a severe impact on the design of the plane), nobody at Boeing thought about how these changes would affect the overall safety of the 737 max. After all, if you change the aerodynamics of the plane, you are changing the way the plane was originally meant to fly (which means that you are creating a new plane). To me, it seems likely that some liberties were taken because Boeing had control of the re-certification process. The 737 max didn't fly like the old 737, but Boeing had the ability to manipulate the paperwork to make it look like it did. That's were I see the systemic failure.

I agree that there’s a systemic failure as something like this is intended to be caught in the certification process but was not. In retrospect there were signs that something was off hence how Boeing was able to trace back what happened. It was a new software design so it’s not inconceivable that no one caught up and quite frankly, if you’re able to “Jedi mind trick” the body governing the certification of the airplane your damn sure going to be able to pass it by VPs, CEOs and Directors whether by obfuscation or failure to mention it.

When the next clean sheet aircraft program rolls around there will up to 10k additional sets of eyes on it for around $2B dollars and hopefully no lives are lost as a result.
 
Brownstone Brownstone storm2006 storm2006

We see things very differently. Speaking as an anarcho communist there are two big things, pertinent to this discussion, I believe.

1.) elite managerial types are not super talented, they have a ton of social capital, usually inherited social capital which is ratified by obtaining elite credentials. The fact that top managers move from totally different sector to other totally different sector indicates that they do not have deep knowledge of their company where they currently work nor their industry where they currently work. The fact that they are managers who move from industry to industry also means that they are not the cream rising to the top, they didn’t work their way through the ranks. They are social class like the barons during the days of Feudalism.

2.) armed aircraft do not protect our freedom. Most people in America already do not have freedom, they are obligated to sell their labor to owners of capital and they usually have no rights or say at work. It’s hard to describe a country where the vast majority of people have to spend the majority of their along hours oriented around laboring in workplaces which are autocratic in nature.

This wretched state of affairs and lack of freedom is not caused by guys in caves in Central Asian or Yemen or in Tehran or even in Moscow. Those people deny freedom to most Americans live in Malibu, Pacific Heights, the Hamptons and Greenwich, CT.
 
Brownstone Brownstone Brownstone Brownstone storm2006 storm2006 storm2006 storm2006

We see things very differently. Speaking as an anarcho communist there are two big things, pertinent to this discussion, I believe.

1.) elite managerial types are not super talented, they have a ton of social capital, usually inherited social capital which is ratified by obtaining elite credentials. The fact that top managers move from totally different sector to other totally different sector indicates that they do not have deep knowledge of their company where they currently work nor their industry where they currently work. The fact that they are managers who move from industry to industry also means that they are not the cream rising to the top, they didn’t work their way through the ranks. They are social class like the barons during the days of Feudalism.

This is something I’ve actually studied for damn near a decade. Despite being a highly reputable, top Boeing executives aren’t coming from the most elite schools. Having said that, I 100% agree that rising to the top is largely based on social capital and the fact you can go from industry to industry supports that. Also, look at these Boards. They are like a good old boys club with a couple women and minorities thrown in for necessity. Industrials are tricky when it comes to selecting leaders. I think it’s becoming easier but historically it’s difficult in that field to find leaders with technical chops as well as elite business acumen. There’s a right mix that you need because leaning too far one way causes issues. It’s honestly like the difference between the right and left in government :lol: I understand that the McNerney and Calhoun, also McAllister for Commercial Airplanes, were outsiders but an overwhelming majority of Boring executives are promoted from within. Defense is tricky because sometimes DC/DoD insiders are brought in (check out their legal team - almost all of them clerked for Supreme Court Justices so there goes that social capital).

2.) armed aircraft do not protect our freedom. Most people in America already do not have freedom, they are obligated to sell their labor to owners of capital and they usually have no rights or say at work. It’s hard to describe a country where the vast majority of people have to spend the majority of their along hours oriented around laboring in workplaces which are autocratic in nature.

This wretched state of affairs and lack of freedom is not caused by guys in caves in Central Asian or Yemen or in Tehran or even in Moscow. Those people deny freedom to most Americans live in Malibu, Pacific Heights, the Hamptons and Greenwich, CT.

1585226933736.gif
 
Reality is that many in here, including RustyShackleford RustyShackleford , would prefer this thread without any openly conservative posters.

dwalk31 dwalk31 I hope you’ve been following this thread since this post. There has been plenty conversation containing differing view points without hostility including about the topic you wanted to discuss about some Americans wanting to go back to work.

This thread isn’t an echo chamber and RustyShackleford RustyShackleford is not the boogeyman. No need to fear monger.

However, RUSTED Shackleford will be DEALT WITH if he continues to stay in Big Mama’s ear and she takes his advice to remove him from the WhatsApp Group Chat. Beeleedat.
 
dwalk31 dwalk31 I hope you’ve been following this thread since this post. There has been plenty conversation containing differing view points without hostility including about the topic you wanted to discuss about some Americans wanting to go back to work.

This thread isn’t an echo chamber and RustyShackleford RustyShackleford is not the boogeyman. No need to fear monger.

However, RUSTED Shackleford will be DEALT WITH if he continues to stay in Big Mama’s ear and she takes his advice to remove him from the WhatsApp Group Chat. Beeleedat.

Having differing views does not mean this thread has openly conservative posters.

I posted a gallup poll that showed that Trump has a 60% approval rating in his handling of this coronavirus situation.

In this thread, I imagine he has a 99% disapproval rating. This thread is not indicative of the typical American voter. It leans sharply left. And there aren't any openly conservative posters--aside from me.

The fact that people have differing views doesn't change the fact that this is an echo chamber of mostly left-leaning partisans.

That said, I have no issue with it. But let's not pretend that it is something it isn't.
 
Back
Top Bottom