Boeing must be back to flattering Trump, or else he would attack them by name.
But there's a non-zero chance that he demanded to take the controls of Air Force One and was refused.
Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus
Boeing must be back to flattering Trump, or else he would attack them by name.
Older and simpler is what we have for a potus.Holman wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:04 pmBoeing must be back to flattering Trump, or else he would attack them by name.
But there's a non-zero chance that he demanded to take the controls of Air Force One and was refused.
While cars are planar and planes are 3 dimensional, the amount of data needed to keep cars driving autonomously in traffic has got to be exponentially higher than airplanes, which are mostly staying level, then descending at a fixed rate once put on the correct approach (not sure if the approach is automated or not). Because planes have such simplistic movements, with a 3rd party monitoring it and every other plane around it, not to mention anything radar sees in the air is important, while the ground is covered in useless objects that aren't important but register anyway, eating up processing.Smoove_B wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:26 pm My cousin is a licensed commercial pilot that now specializes in accident investigation claims for an insurance company. When we talk about flying (quite regularly, actually) he's quick to point out that planes are mostly autonomous now. Everyone marvels at the idea of a self-driving car, but planes already do it (and have been for some time). In his experience, when there are catastrophic failures on aircraft, it's because there has been a system malfunction that requires the pilot or flight crew to (1) quickly recognize something is wrong and then (2) respond by manually taking over and correcting the problem. His experience once again is that because planes are now so highly autonomous, pilots have lost the ability to do the first or second thing - they're rusty. He also pointed out this will likely be the inevitable conclusion for self-driving cars. As we start to rely on them more, when they need us to take over, we won't be ready. The difference is a matter of scale.
So it's not that Trump is wrong, but as usual he's not understanding the whole picture.
He's saying that technology has made commercial flying safer, despite the added complexity and the issues that complexity may cause.
You might think that, now that Europe and Asia have grounded the Boeing 737 MAX 8 over safety concerns, the Federal Aviation Administration would want to make sure Americans are safe. Think again.
Trump’s FAA, under Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao (who also happens to be Mitch McConnell’s wife), is doing absolutely nothing about anything. From today’s Wall Street Journal:
“Thirty-five congressional mandates sit unanswered, on everything from minimum seat space to secondary barriers protecting cockpits. The top job at the Federal Aviation Administration has been open for 14 months. Enforcement fines against major U.S. airlines have dropped 88 percent in the past two years, even as three-hour tarmac delays have more than doubled… Even with airlines begging for rules on emotional-support animals, and both Republicans and Democrats expressing concerns about swollen fees, shrunken seating and punitive airline policies, the DOT has been loath to issue new regulations.”
And what about the Boeing 737 MAX 8? The Journal goes on to report: “So far, the FAA, siding with Boeing and U.S. airlines, says the plane is safe and a software fix is coming by the end of April.” Meanwhile, Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg has personally lobbied Trump not to ground the plane.
So, friends, when you’re up there at 40,000 feet, you can relax because Boeing says the plane is safe. And that’s all that counts in Trump’s Washington.
Advanced syphilis didn't make the list?LordMortis wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 2:49 pm His saving words is a sign of:
Strokes, depression, excessive long-term alcohol consumption, infections, hormonal disorders, nutritional deficiencies, brain tumors, and dementia.
Take your pick.
Boeing is kind of good at airplanes. Just saying. I know they have a vested interest in keeping the 727 Max flying but another crash, especially in the US, would be catastrophic. If there was any hint that it might happen, I think they would take the side of caution. Or at least wouldn't fight to keep it airborne so ardently.
It's true that in a tiny number of recent cases the tech may have contributed to the accident. But Trump's blanket statement that air travel has become too complex for humankind only makes sense if the 737 is uniquely technological or if air travel deaths are consistently high in the current tech era.Unagi wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:47 pm OK, I kinda thought that was what he was saying... but there is a little room for making the argument given the recent 737 crashes, as those crashes may very well be the result of the plane's flight correction system forcing the planes nose down.
So, for the folks on those planes (hypothetically) -- technology (perhaps) did make their flight less safe. And of course, the intangibles that smoove mentions (that our pilot's skills are dulling)...
Um... Brownshirt much?Trump to Breitbart on how the left plays tough: "I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump — I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point and then it would be very bad, very bad."
Angry Staff Officer wrote: Apropos of absolutely nothing, the US military supports and defends the Constitution of the United States
I find it rather disturbing that the President will soon be vetoing a check on his own power.Zaxxon wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:26 pm Congress: About that national emergency...
Senate votes to reject Trump’s emergency declaration, setting up president’s first veto
https://wapo.st/2TMFTZX
I don't think you understand. He has the military. The left has Hollywood. He has the police. The left has fake news. That's all a wash.LordMortis wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:33 pm He's the president. He ought to have the support of the military. Is he suggesting that he would use them to play tough against "the left". I just don't see me going to Breitbart to source context.
Yeah, there is that. Can you imagine if Obama vetoed in this scenario?Skinypupy wrote:I find it rather disturbing that the President will soon be vetoing a check on his own power.Zaxxon wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:26 pm Congress: About that national emergency...
Senate votes to reject Trump’s emergency declaration, setting up president’s first veto
https://wapo.st/2TMFTZX
It works for Maduro.LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:03 pm What tips the balance here, the turning point in American history, is the fact that he has Bikers for Trump. They are bikers. And they're for Trump. And they're tough apparently.
Obama wasn't a god emperor.Zaxxon wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:04 pmYeah, there is that. Can you imagine if Obama vetoed in this scenario?Skinypupy wrote:I find it rather disturbing that the President will soon be vetoing a check on his own power.Zaxxon wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:26 pm Congress: About that national emergency...
Senate votes to reject Trump’s emergency declaration, setting up president’s first veto
https://wapo.st/2TMFTZX
See, this is what I don't get. In the middle east (including Egypt) you have people voting for less democracy. Less control over their own fates. You have students protesting and demanding less access to information and freedom.
Great Leader hates the people you hate.
Hey, nothing wrong with snark!
And Putin has the Night Wolves.Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:12 pmIt works for Maduro.LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:03 pm What tips the balance here, the turning point in American history, is the fact that he has Bikers for Trump. They are bikers. And they're for Trump. And they're tough apparently.
Maybe they don't trust their fellow citizen?GreenGoo wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:22 pmSee, this is what I don't get. In the middle east (including Egypt) you have people voting for less democracy. Less control over their own fates. You have students protesting and demanding less access to information and freedom.
Why on earth would anyone *want* someone else to be a god emperor? Why would you support that coming into being? Is it the Leopards Eating Peoples' Faces Party phenomenon?
Huh? Obviously they don't trust their fellow citizen. I don't trust my fellow citizen. Not trusting your fellow citizen is *why* a god emperor is a bad idea.
Well, it's a *little* more complicated than that. Egyptians are (were?) voting on the "make Sissi god-emperor" referendum, but it's not like that's a free and fair voting situation. Everyone there fully knows that voting "no" on the god emperor referendum is going to get them consequences from the servants of the god emperor.GreenGoo wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:22 pmSee, this is what I don't get. In the middle east (including Egypt) you have people voting for less democracy. Less control over their own fates. You have students protesting and demanding less access to information and freedom.
Why on earth would anyone *want* someone else to be a god emperor? Why would you support that coming into being? Is it the Leopards Eating Peoples' Faces Party phenomenon?