Clearly, if you gamble and lose, the only answer is to gamble more, gamble harder, gamble faster. Double and redouble.
You’ll win out eventually, guaranteed.
Boeing is liable to it’s investors and there will surely be a demand for institutional change on how they do business.
China Airlines 5116, a Boeing 777, has a cruising speed of 564 mph, but the jet stream bumped it up over 800 mph
Non-paywalled repost:
A man died after he stole a plane from an airport in Addison, Texas, then crashed it near the Texas-Oklahoma border Wednesday, officials said.
The Texas Department of Public Safety said the plane, a Cessna 172, was stolen from the ATP Flight School at Addison Airport, about 15 miles north of downtown Dallas. …
An air traffic control recording from earlier in the flight captured an exchange about his plans.
“About right now you’ll probably realize that I’m not going to listen to y’all’s instructions and I’m just heading to East Texas,” he said, according to ATC recordings obtained by NBC News. “I’m going to pull the comm 1 circuit breaker and the comm 2 circuit breaker right here soon, as soon as I unkey the mic.”
East Texas, yet he crashed near the Oklahoma border.
That there is all you need to know about the decedent.
If he knew about the circuit breakers he might have known something about aircraft and flying.
But not much about navigation.
Well he got the “getting off the ground” part right but didn’t do as well with the landing part. He got an “A” on gravity and was able to show his work.
Don’t need no comm circuit breakers. Just turn down the volume or take off your headset. Or change freqs to something random.
Moron.
I’m sad for the aircraft.
1st Max-9 airplane back in the air. Alaska Airlines COO Constance von Muehlen took the flight and sat in the seat next to the door plug.
I suspect she kept her seat belt on and secured her cell phone in the overhead.
Meh, not sure why they’re getting so excited about what is basically a weather phenomenon. Talking about “faster than sound” in some of these articles is especially deceptive. In the pic below where a KLM flight got a similar tailwind assist, the ground speed of 711 kn (818 mph) results from a fairly brisk but perfectly ordinary true airspeed of 591.5 mph.
… and was seen, prior to boarding, applying duct tape to certain sections of the fuselage. 
I read various Facebook and Reddit groups that sometimes have someone exclaiming how a passenger jet “went supersonic!”
If I’m bored I will explain that the speed of sound is measured relative to the medium the sound is travelling through, ie the air, and so the plane’s speed must be measured by the same reference to compare the two. In which case the plane was doing the standard ≈80% of the speed of sound.
Half the time I think they’re trolling.
The problem with journalism is that the people involved in the process are not all-knowing. To create news requires vetting the facts which is time consuming. Insert “deadline” in a business market that is imploding financially and requires stories that grab attention quickly to survive. A great deal of it is “news” re-posted from other sources.
Moroff.
(technically / biologically speaking)
I just watched the first 2 episodes of Masters of the Air, a follow-on to Band of Brothers and The Pacific. It’s covering B-17 aircrew of WW2, and it’s great.
I love all the technical detail, but one item has me puzzled. There is a decal attached to the front of each pilot’s seat headrest. The decal on one seat has a table with lots of data; the other looks like instructions. So what are they for, and why are they in such an odd location? I mean, to read them, the pilots would have to unbelt, lean forward, and turn 180.
Not sure. Thought it might be for the crew behind them.
No idea, but you can briefly see the decals here:
Too small to read, though. It does seem like an odd location.
WAG - Airspeed and performance limitation charts? The position is a little odd, but given the real estate in such a cockpit this might be as conspicuous as they could get in placing this data. A lot of “standard” operations were probably memory items so a quick glance over the shoulder might be enough to confirm a value when needed? A hell of a lot easier than pulling out a literal manual and finding the right page.
The modern-day analogous standard might be 14 CFR 25.1563 perhaps?