If they agree, either one. If they don’t agree, neither.
From: Ken Hohhof
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 10:12 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT bad stock tips
Seems like you’d need at least 3 sensors so you could do a vote, otherwise how
do you know which sensor to believe?
From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of Bill Prince
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 11:03 AM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT bad stock tips
It was more than just software. AOA sensors can malfunction. The mere fact they
made AOA sensor redundancy optional opened the door to this fiasco.
The other issue that doesn't get enough attention is pilot
training/proficiency. When automatic systems hit boundary conditions, it helps
to know what your options are.
bp<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 11/12/2019 8:43 AM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
Nobody mentions the Airbus angle of attack sensors that caused a Lufthansa to
almost crash.
They had the luxury of altitude or it would have been a similar disaster.
According to the interwebs, AOA sensors have caused 50 similar type of
situations in the past five years over a wide spectrum of aircraft.
Apparently one brand fails more than another common brand.
Sensor failure happens. Software can make it less or more of a problem.
Training can make it non fatal.
The MCAS software was to blame here.
I also do not believe that any automated control input system should be
stronger than the pilots.
Moreover, if the pilots are putting in an input opposite that of an onboard
system, something should disconnect the onboard system automatically I would
think.
Imagine getting into a wrestling match with your Tesla that decided to take
an off ramp.
From: Bill Prince
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 9:22 AM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT bad stock tips
Yup. Moving those engines forward to make clearance was a change that really
narrowed the CG box. My own thought was to figure out a way to make the landing
gear longer without affecting the CG. Oh well. They made their bed...
bp<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 11/12/2019 8:15 AM, Carl Peterson wrote:
The newer high efficiency engines are too big to fit under the wings. The
engineers told them it wouldn't work. The original plan was to start working
on designing a new plane, but they were afraid of losing business to neo so the
engineers were told to make it work. In order to do this, they pushed the
engines up and mostly in front of the wing which pushed CG forward and moved
center of thrust. This lead to a plane that needs a much narrower flight
envelope, i.e it doesn't want to fly in a lot of attitudes where a real 737 is
fine.
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 9:48 AM <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
Why do you believe it is inherently flawed?
It is a 737, the airframe with the best track record on the planet.
It is too bad they did not have a voting/contention algorithm between the
two angle of attack sensors and chose to only use one as the authoritative
source. That was a boneheaded coding decision. The other sensor had live data
on the network that was there for the using.
It is too bad the pilots failed to absorb the training update telling
them to switch off the system when it was causing control inputs that were
obviously wrong.
It is too bad the pilots did not simply switch it off. I have had
runaway trim motors try to do this to me before and that is something you learn
during primary training.
Even then, you can recover almost all upsets with
“push-power-rudder-roll-climb”.
It is too bad that Boeing did not immediately tell operators to cease
using that system after the first crash.
But this is just one system amongst hundreds on the aircraft, all tried
and true for many years.
From: Carl Peterson
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 7:18 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT bad stock tips
The Max is inherently flawed and I'd generally say don't bet on things
with inherent flaws. Think F35 and how long it took to get that kind of sort
of right. The CG is too far forward. Perhaps if they stretched the aft
section a little and swept the wings back a little but then it wouldn't be a
737 anymore.
I have an idea of building up a list of ISPs with rural exposure and
shorting them because Sarlink is going to blow up a lot of their business
model. In particular, I'd look for double play ISPs with ARPU above about
75.
On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 9:39 PM Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
Boeing is going to have a good year. The MAX 737 saga is coming to an
end and their while system will be better because of it. And then it will be
forgotten. Just like VW emissions testing...
Even so, I am going to stick with my super high priced index fund. It
is at a historical high and I still dumped more money into it.
From: Ken Hohhof
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 8:26 PM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT bad stock tips
Something like 6 months ago my financial advisor convinced me to sell
my GM stock and buy Boeing. I’ve suspected I did something stupid ever since.
Getting out of GM was probably OK, but I think Boeing has plenty of room to
drop. I am afraid investors may dump BA as end of year approaches to clean up
their portfolio or take tax losses, and in any case, they are not looking like
a well run company.
So if you want to double down on your Moviepass adventure, you could
buy a bunch of Boeing.
Or how about Frontier Communications? A bargain at less than $1. 5
years ago they were at $100. Bloomberg article a couple days ago says they are
looking for a new CEO ahead of an expected bankruptcy filing. Which was
totally predictable when they took on a mountain of debt to buy all the areas
that Verizon and AT&T didn’t want. It has to be bottoming out. No where to go
but up, right?
From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 9:03 PM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] OT bad stock tips
I am thinking of following up my strategic Moviepass investment with
one in PG&E. It has to be bottoming out. No where to go but up, right?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
Carl Peterson
PORT NETWORKS
401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553
Baltimore, MD 21202
(410) 637-3707
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
Carl Peterson
PORT NETWORKS
401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553
Baltimore, MD 21202
(410) 637-3707
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
