The 777 crash - another theory

Hi,

In article ,
Bertie the wrote:
People who read it and believe anything in it should be disqualified
form voting. Especially in a country that has nuclear weapons and a
habit of embarking on idiotic military adventures.

Hmm...oh. The irony.



Now now, you're making assumptions.

I am? Actually, you're probably right, I am.

But are they incorrect ones?

Andy

"Phil J" wrote

That is usually how it works with software bugs. The ones that are
easy to generate get caught in testing. It's the bugs that require
some really unusual and unlikely combination of inputs that tend to
get through into production code.

Also, note that I am not saying that this did happen, but there are always
the "updated" software packages that get added, over the years. One of
those could have contained a new, unanticipated problem.
--
Jim in NC

In article ,

- Faulty coffee maker shorts cabin electrics.


actually... this one is plausible

--
Eduardo K. | Some say it's forgive and forget.
http://www.carfun.cl | I say forget about forgiving just accept.
http://ev.nn.cl | And get the hell out of town.
| Minnie Driver, Grosse Point Blank

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Flydive wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Funny, I don't remember seeing a phone in the flight deck.

I'll have a good ol look around tomorrow.


Bertie
Well, that probably depends on the airline/aircraft, is sure possible to
have it installed as an option.

Nah. Nobody dos that on airliners. We have several methods of geting
messages to/from already, primarily ACARS.

Several Business aircraft have them, mostly Iridium/Sat phone.


I doubt anyone has them n the cockpit, though.


Bertie


Well, cannot say about other aircraft, but all Global Express have a
Iridium/Sat phone in the cockpit, is installed in the aft part of the
center pedestal, it is standard equipment and has a separate number from
the ones in the cabin.

On Jan 22, 7:27*am, D Ramapriya wrote:
Here's an intriguing take on what might have caused the 777's engine
to shut down. A dramatic pic of the moment of impact included...http://thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article711639.ece

Ramapriya

Do you find it interesting that this was not reported in a real
newspaper?

-Robert

On Jan 24, 2:45 am, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
On Jan 22, 7:27 am, D Ramapriya wrote:

Here's an intriguing take on what might have caused the 777's engine
to shut down. A dramatic pic of the moment of impact included...http://thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article711639.ece

Ramapriya

Do you find it interesting that this was not reported in a real
newspaper?

-Robert

Yes, quite - apart from other lightweights like Switched and
Cnet.com.au. But to just have a look at the pic of the moment of
impact - which I don't recall seeing elsewhere - makes it worthwhile
to point your browser Sun-ward

Ramapriya

On 23 Jan, 19:29, Andy Hawkins wrote:
Hi,

In article ,
* * * * * *Bertie the wrote:

People who read it and believe anything in it should be disqualified
form voting. Especially in a country that has nuclear weapons and a
habit of embarking on idiotic military adventures.

Hmm...oh. The irony.

Now now, you're making assumptions.

I am? Actually, you're probably right, I am.

But are they incorrect ones?


That particular one, yes. But i'll say no more.

Bertie

On 23 Jan, 22:28, Flydive wrote:
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Flydive wrote :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Funny, I don't remember seeing a phone in the flight deck.

I'll have a good ol look around tomorrow.

Bertie
Well, that probably depends on the airline/aircraft, is sure possible to
have it installed as an option.

Nah. Nobody dos that on airliners. We have several methods of geting
messages to/from already, primarily ACARS.

Several Business aircraft have them, mostly Iridium/Sat phone.

I doubt anyone has them n the cockpit, though.

Bertie

Well, cannot say about other aircraft, but all Global Express have a
Iridium/Sat phone in the cockpit, is installed in the aft part of the
center pedestal, it is standard equipment and has a separate number from
the ones in the cabin.- Hide quoted text -


Oh, OK, news to me! I stand corrected.

We're stil relying on ACARS.

Stil, a sat phone is hardly gonna get a call from sp[rint.


Bertie

On Jan 23, 3:08*pm, "Morgans" wrote:

Also, note that I am not saying that this did happen, but there are always
the "updated" software packages that get added, over the years. *One of
those could have contained a new, unanticipated problem.
--
Jim in NC

Moving steadily off-topic...

Yeah, with computers there is no such thing as a small change. I
don't know how many times in my career I have fixed a bug only to
discover that my fix has caused yet another bug. And these days with
object-oriented code the software is more fragmented, with more
interdependent moving parts, which makes unintended consequences more
likely. I'm not knocking OO code, but I do think it tends to make
programs more complex than the old procedural stuff. And greater
complexity generally makes testing more difficult. Just one geek's
opinion.

Phil

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:


Stil, a sat phone is hardly gonna get a call from sp[rint.


Bertie


Agree