crazytony

As far as weights go, the 707 and the 767-200s that hit the towers were fairly close in size, weight and fuel capacity and that is demonstrated by both towers surviving their impacts. The problem was the fire and specifically the inability to fight the scale of the fire effectively.

One other compounding problem is that Delta's headquarters and main traffic patterns are on the east coast. Crowdstrike affected all the airlines at roughly the same time. This gave them roughly one to two fewer hours to respond before they hit their morning peak flights.

As someone else pointed out, they probably weren't ready by the time they needed their systems for the morning rush so they went to their business continuity strategy (manual). This has a throughput and recovery time penalty and obviously it compounds the longer they are in that mode.

I think what we're finding with the Southwest meltdown and now the Delta meltdown is that the big airlines just don't have the manpower or scheduling slack to accommodate going into business continuity. I do think this should be investigated. Hopefully financial penalties incentivize action but time will tell.

Funny you should mention WN. Delta's meltdown is the exact same scenario as Southwest. Crew scheduling is messed up, they don't have a way of tracking where employees are, if the employee is legal, etc and so the operation grinds to a halt

Have spent all my afternoon and all evening on a bridge trying to support flailing systems. Was supposed to be on a plane in 5 hours to start my vacation. Guaranteed it's not gonna happen.

With hearing 911 and other safety critical systems going down, I hope that the worst that comes out of this is a couple delayed flights and a couple missed bank payments.

This rollercoaster is not over yet. There's a crowdstrike issue causing windows machines/servers to brick globally and this industry is heavily windows dependent. It may or may not be related to the Azure issue but it's suspicious to me.

https://www.reddit.com/r/crowdstrike/comments/1e6vmkf/bsod_e...

Looking at flightradar24, the only real upset I see is the turn over the southern Sierra Nevada range which is also ~55 minutes before arrival into OAK.

Wonder if mountain waves play any part in this incident? It's the only thing I can think of that could possibly generate a dutch roll without continuing flight stability issues. (They could have also turned on/off something like the yaw damper in the cockpit but that's not specifically called out int he report)

I can't imagine the standby PCU causing this incident unless there was some kind of electrical or pneumatic issue causing it to engage.

But 737 + PCU issues (yes, I know it's been redesigned) is never a good day.

Hopefully we'll get a NTSB report on this one.

This is extremely disingenuous. A dutch roll if identified and corrected is not structurally dangerous to an aircraft but it typically signifies something wrong with the control surfaces which is a larger issue. In the majority of the cases, it's the yaw damper that's a problem (my suspicion in the 737 case).

JAL 123 crashed because hydraulic pressure on all 4 hydraulic lines and 90% of the vertical stabilizer and 100% of the rudder were lost due to an explosive decompression of the aft pressure bulkhead. Dutch rolls ensued because of the loss of lateral direction control.

The KC-135 crashed because the rudder power control unit on the rudder was faulty and the pilots failed to identify the problem. They then used alternating rudder inputs to recover which caused the structural limits of the vertical stabilizer to be exceeded its structural limits and separate (along with the rest of the tail).

The Air Transat flight (961) had the entire rudder separate from the aircraft most likely due to stress fractures. This caused the aircraft to have extremely limited lateral directional control which caused the dutch rolls.

Radar, planning software and routing have all gotten much, much better in the last decade.

I believe even as late as 2007 or 2008, ATC was limited in the deviations it could do due to the track system still in use in certain areas. Once the ARTCC/TRACONs were updated, ATC in the US now has way more capability and capacity to re-route traffic around storms. I forget when the last ARTCC refresh/rebuild happened.

I'm really at a loss on this news. All the employees at airlines in the US I know of have this drilled into them on a regular basis and it's just taken for granted that you report incidents when they happen (even when someone falls: report it!) and the incident will get investigated.

It just confounds me (but explains a lot) that the manufacturer of the aircraft the airlines operate does not share a similar safety culture given that they are in a similar ecosystem (airlines report issues to the manufacturer and the FAA/NTSB all the time)

yes. It wasn't about cost at all. It's the same reason there are no cameras on the flight deck.

and the manufacturer can be held liable for lost revenue so even if the AC is grounded, you can get some $$$

The counter point to operating one type is on display here: if the regulator grounds the type, your whole airline is stuck.

The only thing that eliminates/highlights issues is time. The 320 and 220 are faced with major engine issues and groundings due to looks at notes not QAing the metal powder used in the sintering process for over 8 years.

It's weird to me that they unloaded anything in the hold for what should have been a refuel-and-go. Unless they're expecting you to be held on the ground for 3+ hours, they typically don't even bother getting the pax out much less the bags.

But there's always https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YGc4zOqozo

Every incident has to go into the carrier's safety reporting system which is then followed up by the FAA and/or NTSB. Even stuff as simple as a flight attendant feeling fatigued after not getting enough rest goes into the SRS.

I don't think the public has access to the SRS but the FAA and NTSB do.

In situations like this, it helps to remember that there is no disjoint between you and the pilots. They are in the same exact situation as you: if the fuel runs out, they crash the same as you. They're not willfully going to put their (and your) lives in danger. They want to get home safely to their families the same as you do.

Dispatch and route planning (and the fuel that goes into the planning) is really intense and takes into account hundreds of factors including stuff like how much fuel do I need if I can't land at my nominated backup airport and have to go to a secondary backup airport.

Domestically, checked baggage can fly even if you don't. It depends on the situation.

If you are in Japan, I would highly suggest you visit the Toyota museum in Nagoya. Toyota started as a loom manufacturer and the museum has a ton of working artifacts (I recall one is from the 1600s).

They have a tour that shows you the full evolution of the loom technology including one operating by punch cards.

I had no idea until I visited the museum shortly before COVID

How is making a rational judgement based upon low signal to noise ratios the sign of an immature world?

I guess this is part of the coverup

https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgad.nsf...

and

https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgad.nsf...

and

https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgad.nsf...

and

https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgad.nsf...

there's about ~20 total unique if I recall. Some supersede others.

Yeah. I did. I can apparently read and do simple math.

The monthly numbers for 2020 are: 12,852 12,842 12,797 11,914 9,713 10,442 11,006 10,577 10,921 10,457 11,196 11,169

which yields an average production of 11323.83333 thousand barrels a day for the year.

This year, production is the following: 11,369 11,316 11,701 11,668 11,615 11,816

which yields an average production of 11580.83333 thousand barrels a day for the year.

11580 (2022) is greater than 11323 (2020) by about ~22%.

*citation needed.

Oh nevermind.

US Field Production of Oil: https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=M...

US production in 2022 is up 29% over 2021 (when Biden took office)

US production in 2022 is up 22% over 2020.

that's probably true. I see 4 in the FAA registry. I don't see any MiG 25s but I see 5 MiG 29s in the FAA's US registry.

Even the MiG 29 would get you marginally better Mach numbers (2.2 vs 2.0) and better payload. Plus they were produced in similar numbers as the F104.

Aside from the acres of hyperbole in this article: getting to the bottom of this article, this approach seems strange to me. Why bother with the F104? Feels like you'd want to maximize speed-at-cieling and weight-to-ceiling for an air based rocket launch. Something like a MiG-25 could take a heavier rocket much faster at the same altitude (Mach 3.2 vs 2.0 for the F104).

Generous like this table from your article?

                   cost(2013$) riders(thousand)   cost/rider
  O-Train (lrt) 	27M$       14                   1901$
  

...

If you don't understand why your table is extremely flawed then you should pull this article. If you do understand then you are being disingenuous not generous.

If you ever get the chance, visit the memorial and museum in Hiroshima.

But less predictable in terms of overall performance due to all the shared components.

It's also harder to separate two or more processes that 'grew up' together in the same container/machine/vm.

Seems like an ok 'Hello, Unikernel' article if a bit forced but her point about bots mining on AWS actually undermines her deployment strategy: the miners have been compromising AWS credentials/security NOT boxes hosted on AWS. They don't want your little t2.micro instance running a static server. They startup new c3.8xlarge instances and deploy their software.

She's still hosting this thing in AWS so she's still vulnerable and no amount of Unikerneling is going to save her from that attack vector.

Sorry for the pun and creating a verb out of a noun.

Due to Chinese law not allowing foreign investment in several sectors (including online) Softbank and Yahoo do not own any of Alibaba. They own a percentage of a Cayman Islands holding firm that have contract(s) with Alibaba that stipulate voting and profit sharing. The Chinese Government could invalidate these contracts at any time should they decide the contracts breach the letter or spirit of their laws.

aside from the plastic it sounds like he'll get on just fine at Apple.

Looks like a limitation of the radar system. The view that he's showing is a composite view (there's no weather radar that could cover all of Sweden from one single installation). I suspect that there are two stations in Stockholm (one at Arlanda and one south of the city) and that the one south of the city is out of service. The "missing" area is due to the weather radar at Arlanda not being built to view directly overhead. Normally this is hidden by overlaying the same readings from two covering stations.

not sure I follow? Most sql templates I have seen behave like Django's .raw() function (which inspects the resultset and auto binds to the object)