Timeline for What technology is being moved forward to keep pilots from crashing planes?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 30, 2015 at 14:33 | comment | added | Calphool | Sometimes in software engineering you'll hear people say something like "We built this system to be idiot proof, and then they built better idiots." | |
| Mar 29, 2015 at 14:15 | history | edited | Peter Kämpf | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 190 characters in body
|
| Mar 29, 2015 at 14:08 | comment | added | FreeMan | "In the end, if people are determined enough, they will find a way around all preventive measures. Human ingenuity will always trump bureaucratic procedures." That right there is the winning statement. If a human can devise a solution, another human will come up with a way to defeat it. | |
| Mar 28, 2015 at 19:59 | comment | added | cpast | Which, of course, probably wouldn't stop a pilot from turning off the nav equipment or shutting off the engines to disable the system. The point of all these things is more to prevent accidents than to prevent intentional crashing. | |
| Mar 28, 2015 at 12:17 | history | edited | Peter Kämpf | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 13 characters in body
|
| Mar 28, 2015 at 12:15 | comment | added | Peter Kämpf | @raptortech97: Good point, but this should only be needed in case of engine or complete nav system failure. The system can only prevent ground contact if enough thrust is available, and would minimize sink rate otherwise. Ground contact will then be inevitable, and the pilot should be able to select the precise spot. | |
| Mar 28, 2015 at 12:08 | comment | added | raptortech97 | Also, pilots must always have the authority to make an emergency landing at a non-airport. | |
| Mar 28, 2015 at 8:10 | history | answered | Peter Kämpf | CC BY-SA 3.0 |