Re: Not surprised
From that description, neither can I. Why wasn't a 'proper' phone call possible/available/relevant?
1525 posts • joined 12 Jun 2009
From what I understand, collision avoidance on aircraft is an extension to the transponder tech that identifies them to ground-based radar. Basically, if one plane hears another transponder nearby, it tracks where that transponder claims to be, does the maths, and adjust course if the track is too close.
IIRC there was an exploit mentioned very recently that relied on this to turn another aircraft, by repeatedly lying (slightly) about the location of the attacking transponder.
Nah, Gib isn't 'fun' the way you mean it - you get such a great view wherever you are sitting in the plane, (though better on the right hand side.) Sure, it isn't anything like as straight as most airports, but the only significant danger is over-running.
"It is unclear whether three similar magnetometers would have been immune to the strong electromagnetic field generated by a passing train."
Sorry, but its perfectly obvious that ANY magnetometers would have been affected - it was the field being 'unexpected' that was the problem, not the readings, so three independent devices would NOT have helped.
1. Clearly label the ports with a unique ID
2. Clearly label the cable with a unique ID
3. Document what each ID currently connects to, etc.
As noted, a label on a patch panel identifying the source never gets changes when it should, and labels on patch cables even less so. Altering the documentation is far easier and more reliable.
"2. There is nothing wrong with the mind, what's wrong is the body. "
Citation very much needed. Until someone finds an _actual_ cure then the case remains open - just because a judge decided one way doesn't make it so. But even if it is a physical 'fault' then psychotherapy would still appear to be extremely useful.
So, do you really think that either side are telling the truth 100%, or do you think there may be have been a little attempt (from the professional HR / PR person in particular) to spin this even slightly in their favour?
For example, compare "asked to remain home" with "instruction" later on - the former sounds like it emanates from an informal remark: "why don't you stay home if you are worried?" which is a long way away from the formal warning that they are trying to imply.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020