Bad day for Boeing

For all the Trumpeteers and Liberal Commies to post their screeds.
Post Reply
User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 6569
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#251

Post by Biker » Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:35 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:31 pm
Biker wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:21 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:19 pm
Biker wrote:
Fri Oct 25, 2019 3:02 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Fri Oct 25, 2019 3:02 pm
Biker wrote:
Fri Oct 25, 2019 2:59 pm


There are two redundancies available for purchase
Nope.
Yep, and all the major American carriers purchased them. Better check up on it, GoogleFurhrer
I take it from the silence you now grasp what a redundant system actually is. Maybe you should work on your googlage.
Nah, just not going to debate with someone who doesn’t know jack shit.
Well you're wrong and you know you are, so now you have to necro. What do you think redundancy means? Name the redundant systems for MCAS that you claim US airlines bought.

You cannot answer those simple questions because you understand you are wrong. It was a critical system with a single point of failure and zero redundancies. I doubt you'll have the balls to clarify, but I assume what you mistakenly thought were redundancies were actually an optional warning light showing an AOA disagree, and an optional display showing the output of both AOA sensors. The first warning light wasn't even intended to be an optional extra, it simply didn't work unless the optional display had been purchased due to another fuckup by boeing. They caught it before either crash had occurred and decided it wasn't important enough to tell anyone. Neither feature would have affected the operation of MCAS in any way, since there were no redundancies built in to that. If pilots had been made aware MCAS existed, and also had the warning lights, it may have clued them in to which critical system had failed, but that is not a redundancy, it is a warning. Dodge away.
Sorry, Wikifurhrer, I know and speak with people in the industry all the time, including pilots. Run along and refine your Googling skills

User avatar
AnalHamster
Doctor Chaser
Posts: 4175
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#252

Post by AnalHamster » Mon Oct 28, 2019 3:52 pm

Biker wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:35 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:31 pm
Biker wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:21 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:19 pm
Biker wrote:
Fri Oct 25, 2019 3:02 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Fri Oct 25, 2019 3:02 pm


Nope.
Yep, and all the major American carriers purchased them. Better check up on it, GoogleFurhrer
I take it from the silence you now grasp what a redundant system actually is. Maybe you should work on your googlage.
Nah, just not going to debate with someone who doesn’t know jack shit.
Well you're wrong and you know you are, so now you have to necro. What do you think redundancy means? Name the redundant systems for MCAS that you claim US airlines bought.

You cannot answer those simple questions because you understand you are wrong. It was a critical system with a single point of failure and zero redundancies. I doubt you'll have the balls to clarify, but I assume what you mistakenly thought were redundancies were actually an optional warning light showing an AOA disagree, and an optional display showing the output of both AOA sensors. The first warning light wasn't even intended to be an optional extra, it simply didn't work unless the optional display had been purchased due to another fuckup by boeing. They caught it before either crash had occurred and decided it wasn't important enough to tell anyone. Neither feature would have affected the operation of MCAS in any way, since there were no redundancies built in to that. If pilots had been made aware MCAS existed, and also had the warning lights, it may have clued them in to which critical system had failed, but that is not a redundancy, it is a warning. Dodge away.
Sorry, Wikifurhrer, I know and speak with people in the industry all the time, including pilots. Run along and refine your Googling skills
Yeah, I remember last time I proved you wrong on things you claimed secret knowledge too. Try proving it, Liar.

What do you think redundancy means? Name or describe the redundant systems for MCAS that you claim US airlines bought. You have to avoid these questions because they prove you wrong. Man up, don't be a necro.

Did the CEO email you about secret redundancies that you can't reveal, is that why you have to pretend you can't see the question?

User avatar
AnalHamster
Doctor Chaser
Posts: 4175
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#253

Post by AnalHamster » Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:14 am

Biker wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:03 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:59 pm
Biker wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:56 pm
Did the report come out?
The preliminary report did and you welched, you welcher. Still waiting on the final reports, but since the CEO got demoted, the hearings are finding they knew in advance and kept it quiet, hundreds of people are dead and the planes are still grounded, I'm quietly confident.

Don't worry though, I'm like totally gracious in victory. Not going to rub it in at all.
I didnt welch, as the prelim report is not the official report

Planes will be back by February
737 max production has now been suspended, because they won't.

Seems boeing are having some trouble making their lemon airworthy. As I flagged up months ago, it's not actually possible to fix this without pilot retraining, and they tried to make not needing to do that a major selling point. They slid MCAS in by the backdoor to try and get around a problem with changing the flight envelope, significantly, by shoving bigger engines on a 1960s airframe after airbus caught them with their pants down with the neo. No need to train pilots to deal with the problems they created if a computer did it for them. Then the computer fix killed people. Whoopsie daisy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50817124

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 6569
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#254

Post by Biker » Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:52 pm

Have you figured out what the redundancy options are yet? I suppose its not Googlable

User avatar
AnalHamster
Doctor Chaser
Posts: 4175
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#255

Post by AnalHamster » Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:55 pm

Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:52 pm
Have you figured out what the redundancy options are yet? I suppose its not Googlable
There were none. You were mistaken. I have pointed this out already.

Usually when you make a blatant mistake like that you just run away, which avoids most of the humiliation, yet here you are bringing it up again poor fool. You cannot state what the imaginary redundancies were because they did not exist. A warning light is not a redundant system.

Go ahead and prove me wrong if you can, you lying tit.

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 6569
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#256

Post by Biker » Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:57 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:55 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:52 pm
Have you figured out what the redundancy options are yet? I suppose its not Googlable
There were none. You were mistaken. I have pointed this out already.

Usually when you make a blatant mistake like that you just run away, which avoids most of the humiliation, yet here you are bringing it up again poor fool. You cannot state what the imaginary redundancies were because they did not exist. A warning light is not a redundant system.

Go ahead and prove me wrong if you can, you lying tit.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Youre a fool. I actually speak with pilots and airline executives unlike you, Googlefuhrer

User avatar
AnalHamster
Doctor Chaser
Posts: 4175
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#257

Post by AnalHamster » Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:00 pm

Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:57 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:55 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:52 pm
Have you figured out what the redundancy options are yet? I suppose its not Googlable
There were none. You were mistaken. I have pointed this out already.

Usually when you make a blatant mistake like that you just run away, which avoids most of the humiliation, yet here you are bringing it up again poor fool. You cannot state what the imaginary redundancies were because they did not exist. A warning light is not a redundant system.

Go ahead and prove me wrong if you can, you lying tit.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Youre a fool. I actually speak with pilots and airline executives unlike you, Googlefuhrer
Yeah right, and you get fake news from the CEO direct by email, liar.

I'm stating you are wrong, there was no redundant system available which is why you cannot name it. Pretty simple, your stupid mistake was falsely believing 'redundant system' means 'warning light'. All you would have to do to prove me wrong is state what redundancy was available, shouldn't be too hard to find if it existed, your problem is it didn't.

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 6569
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#258

Post by Biker » Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:09 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:00 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:57 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:55 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:52 pm
Have you figured out what the redundancy options are yet? I suppose its not Googlable
There were none. You were mistaken. I have pointed this out already.

Usually when you make a blatant mistake like that you just run away, which avoids most of the humiliation, yet here you are bringing it up again poor fool. You cannot state what the imaginary redundancies were because they did not exist. A warning light is not a redundant system.

Go ahead and prove me wrong if you can, you lying tit.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Youre a fool. I actually speak with pilots and airline executives unlike you, Googlefuhrer
Yeah right, and you get fake news from the CEO direct by email, liar.

I'm stating you are wrong, there was no redundant system available which is why you cannot name it. Pretty simple, your stupid mistake was falsely believing 'redundant system' means 'warning light'. All you would have to do to prove me wrong is state what redundancy was available, shouldn't be too hard to find if it existed, your problem is it didn't.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
AnalHamster
Doctor Chaser
Posts: 4175
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#259

Post by AnalHamster » Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:19 pm

QED.

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 6569
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#260

Post by Biker » Tue Dec 17, 2019 6:29 pm


User avatar
AnalHamster
Doctor Chaser
Posts: 4175
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#261

Post by AnalHamster » Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:32 pm

Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 6:29 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... res-report

Dipshit
What do you think that says? Do you know what a redundant system is? You keep trying to pretend you know something about this topic yet you cannot answer that. Hint: It is not a warning light, which is the claim you have yet again tried to make there dummy.

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 6569
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#262

Post by Biker » Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:39 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:32 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 6:29 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... res-report

Dipshit
What do you think that says? Do you know what a redundant system is? You keep trying to pretend you know something about this topic yet you cannot answer that. Hint: It is not a warning light, which is the claim you have yet again tried to make there dummy.
:lol:

Those are safety options for the Max. Youre Google skills are declining.

User avatar
AnalHamster
Doctor Chaser
Posts: 4175
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#263

Post by AnalHamster » Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:42 pm

Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:39 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:32 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 6:29 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... res-report

Dipshit
What do you think that says? Do you know what a redundant system is? You keep trying to pretend you know something about this topic yet you cannot answer that. Hint: It is not a warning light, which is the claim you have yet again tried to make there dummy.
:lol:

Those are safety options for the Max. Youre Google skills are declining.
They are warning lights, yes. So are you claiming that a warning light is a redundant system? In other words, are you admitting you do not know what a redundant system is?

Such a simple question you have to run away from, you poor lying fool. Sucks you be you.

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 6569
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#264

Post by Biker » Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:42 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:42 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:39 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:32 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 6:29 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... res-report

Dipshit
What do you think that says? Do you know what a redundant system is? You keep trying to pretend you know something about this topic yet you cannot answer that. Hint: It is not a warning light, which is the claim you have yet again tried to make there dummy.
:lol:

Those are safety options for the Max. Youre Google skills are declining.
They are warning lights, yes. So are you claiming that a warning light is a redundant system? In other words, are you admitting you do not know what a redundant system is?

Such a simple question you have to run away from, you poor lying fool. Sucks you be you.
Here are my choices:

Believe the commercial pilots and airline executive or believe the Googlefurher? Tough one

:lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
AnalHamster
Doctor Chaser
Posts: 4175
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#265

Post by AnalHamster » Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:11 pm

Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:42 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:42 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:39 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:32 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 6:29 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... res-report

Dipshit
What do you think that says? Do you know what a redundant system is? You keep trying to pretend you know something about this topic yet you cannot answer that. Hint: It is not a warning light, which is the claim you have yet again tried to make there dummy.
:lol:

Those are safety options for the Max. Youre Google skills are declining.
They are warning lights, yes. So are you claiming that a warning light is a redundant system? In other words, are you admitting you do not know what a redundant system is?

Such a simple question you have to run away from, you poor lying fool. Sucks you be you.
Here are my choices:

Believe the commercial pilots and airline executive or believe the Googlefurher? Tough one

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Believe what? That a warning light is a redundant system? No commercial pilot or fictional airline executive would claim that, that's just you being stupid and refusing to admit you can see the words.

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 6569
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#266

Post by Biker » Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:45 pm

:lol:

User avatar
Wut
Denmarkian Citizen
Posts: 2667
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 8:11 pm
Location: Bermuda

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#267

Post by Wut » Tue Dec 17, 2019 11:44 pm

I think we need to empanel a UJ jury to resolve this dispute.

Antknot
Needs to step away from the keyboard.
Posts: 1512
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 11:30 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#268

Post by Antknot » Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:05 am

We can't even prove if s.murph is alive or dead. And we supposedly have members living in the same city.
Last edited by Antknot on Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
Blame Hollywood. That's what I do, and it's no less useful than blaming someone with an actual conscience.

User avatar
CaptQuint
UJR Military Attaché
Posts: 12681
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:18 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#269

Post by CaptQuint » Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:06 am

Antknot wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:05 am
We can't even prove I'd s.Murphy is alive or dead. And we supposedly have members living in the same city.
Slap posted the obit, he's gone
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

User avatar
AnalHamster
Doctor Chaser
Posts: 4175
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#270

Post by AnalHamster » Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:31 am

This one is a little simpler than proving if smurph is dead (he is), a redundant system is one where there is an actual redundancy, as in a backup for something that could fail. A simple example of a redundancy is one Boeing belatedly introduced to MCAS - instead of relying on a single sensor, it now relies on two, and will deactivate if they disagree. There is a redundant sensor, one that is only necessary if the other fails. This is what the words mean. A warning light is not a redundant system because it does not do the job of the failed system.

Is there a single person in the forum other than biker, who is only pretending not to understand, who cannot understand the simple meaning of the words? Even the obsessive fan club aren't chiming in on this one.

User avatar
DandyDon
Redneck Commie
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:05 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#271

Post by DandyDon » Wed Dec 18, 2019 3:23 am

AnalHamster wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:31 am
This one is a little simpler than proving if smurph is dead (he is), a redundant system is one where there is an actual redundancy, as in a backup for something that could fail. A simple example of a redundancy is one Boeing belatedly introduced to MCAS - instead of relying on a single sensor, it now relies on two, and will deactivate if they disagree. There is a redundant sensor, one that is only necessary if the other fails. This is what the words mean. A warning light is not a redundant system because it does not do the job of the failed system.

Is there a single person in the forum other than biker, who is only pretending not to understand, who cannot understand the simple meaning of the words? Even the obsessive fan club aren't chiming in on this one.
Pretty close, but not exactly accurate. A true redundant system will take over if there is a failure of system 1, yet still provide full functionality via system two. And you will never notice the change-over, except maybe a warning message or light.

Antknot
Needs to step away from the keyboard.
Posts: 1512
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 11:30 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#272

Post by Antknot » Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:14 am

DandyDon wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 3:23 am
AnalHamster wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:31 am
This one is a little simpler than proving if smurph is dead (he is), a redundant system is one where there is an actual redundancy, as in a backup for something that could fail. A simple example of a redundancy is one Boeing belatedly introduced to MCAS - instead of relying on a single sensor, it now relies on two, and will deactivate if they disagree. There is a redundant sensor, one that is only necessary if the other fails. This is what the words mean. A warning light is not a redundant system because it does not do the job of the failed system.

Is there a single person in the forum other than biker, who is only pretending not to understand, who cannot understand the simple meaning of the words? Even the obsessive fan club aren't chiming in on this one.
Pretty close, but not exactly accurate. A true redundant system will take over if there is a failure of system 1, yet still provide full functionality via system two. And you will never notice the change-over, except maybe a warning message or light.
Exactly. NASA has at least one system that uses 3 computers. If one doesn't match the others it is ignored. That way they know which system is in error.
Blame Hollywood. That's what I do, and it's no less useful than blaming someone with an actual conscience.

User avatar
AnalHamster
Doctor Chaser
Posts: 4175
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#273

Post by AnalHamster » Wed Dec 18, 2019 6:41 am

Antknot wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:14 am
DandyDon wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 3:23 am
AnalHamster wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:31 am
This one is a little simpler than proving if smurph is dead (he is), a redundant system is one where there is an actual redundancy, as in a backup for something that could fail. A simple example of a redundancy is one Boeing belatedly introduced to MCAS - instead of relying on a single sensor, it now relies on two, and will deactivate if they disagree. There is a redundant sensor, one that is only necessary if the other fails. This is what the words mean. A warning light is not a redundant system because it does not do the job of the failed system.

Is there a single person in the forum other than biker, who is only pretending not to understand, who cannot understand the simple meaning of the words? Even the obsessive fan club aren't chiming in on this one.
Pretty close, but not exactly accurate. A true redundant system will take over if there is a failure of system 1, yet still provide full functionality via system two. And you will never notice the change-over, except maybe a warning message or light.
Exactly. NASA has at least one system that uses 3 computers. If one doesn't match the others it is ignored. That way they know which system is in error.
Airbus actually have a similar system to MCAS, and have done for years but it relies on three sensors so it can ignore a bad one based on the other two rather than shutting down the whole system if one fails. Even that has suffered one fatal failure, when 2 sensors jammed and outvoted the third.

User avatar
FSchmertz
Cant Stop Watching His Avatar
Posts: 1686
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:37 am

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#274

Post by FSchmertz » Wed Dec 18, 2019 5:56 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 6:41 am
Antknot wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:14 am
DandyDon wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 3:23 am
AnalHamster wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:31 am
This one is a little simpler than proving if smurph is dead (he is), a redundant system is one where there is an actual redundancy, as in a backup for something that could fail. A simple example of a redundancy is one Boeing belatedly introduced to MCAS - instead of relying on a single sensor, it now relies on two, and will deactivate if they disagree. There is a redundant sensor, one that is only necessary if the other fails. This is what the words mean. A warning light is not a redundant system because it does not do the job of the failed system.

Is there a single person in the forum other than biker, who is only pretending not to understand, who cannot understand the simple meaning of the words? Even the obsessive fan club aren't chiming in on this one.
Pretty close, but not exactly accurate. A true redundant system will take over if there is a failure of system 1, yet still provide full functionality via system two. And you will never notice the change-over, except maybe a warning message or light.
Exactly. NASA has at least one system that uses 3 computers. If one doesn't match the others it is ignored. That way they know which system is in error.
Airbus actually have a similar system to MCAS, and have done for years but it relies on three sensors so it can ignore a bad one based on the other two rather than shutting down the whole system if one fails. Even that has suffered one fatal failure, when 2 sensors jammed and outvoted the third.
If I recall correctly, the military version (maybe the neo though) was required to monitor both sensors, unlike the commercial. Apparently the military requires back up systems in their contracts.

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 6569
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#275

Post by Biker » Wed Dec 18, 2019 5:57 pm

FSchmertz wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 5:56 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 6:41 am
Antknot wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:14 am
DandyDon wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 3:23 am
AnalHamster wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:31 am
This one is a little simpler than proving if smurph is dead (he is), a redundant system is one where there is an actual redundancy, as in a backup for something that could fail. A simple example of a redundancy is one Boeing belatedly introduced to MCAS - instead of relying on a single sensor, it now relies on two, and will deactivate if they disagree. There is a redundant sensor, one that is only necessary if the other fails. This is what the words mean. A warning light is not a redundant system because it does not do the job of the failed system.

Is there a single person in the forum other than biker, who is only pretending not to understand, who cannot understand the simple meaning of the words? Even the obsessive fan club aren't chiming in on this one.
Pretty close, but not exactly accurate. A true redundant system will take over if there is a failure of system 1, yet still provide full functionality via system two. And you will never notice the change-over, except maybe a warning message or light.
Exactly. NASA has at least one system that uses 3 computers. If one doesn't match the others it is ignored. That way they know which system is in error.
Airbus actually have a similar system to MCAS, and have done for years but it relies on three sensors so it can ignore a bad one based on the other two rather than shutting down the whole system if one fails. Even that has suffered one fatal failure, when 2 sensors jammed and outvoted the third.
If I recall correctly, the military version (maybe the neo though) was required to monitor both sensors, unlike the commercial. Apparently the military requires back up systems in their contracts.
Yep and some airlines didnt buy purchase a single option, including Southwest

Post Reply