Re: No need to reinvent the wheel
>> liquid N2 : He : He3 : Printer Ink
Fixed it for you.
89 posts • joined 23 Feb 2016
I disagree. Something that relies on a combination of physical strength and bits of string to control the moving surfaces of a passenger aircraft should be relegated to the past where it belongs.
Having a computer in the middle allows for enormous redundancy and improved safety, along with better passenger comfort.
I can't see why OS would expect to be able to flog their map data when (almost) equally good mapping / contour data is available for free from Openstreemap.
Ordnance Survey seem somewhat behind the curve here - historically they've been obsessed with protecting their data from third parties (ahem "taxpayers") to the extent that they completely missed the boat.
I cursed when trying to read a daily summary only to discover that it was in xlsx format. Google Docs managed to open it and I mentally admonished the government for using Excel to present data, but assumed that it was an export from a deeper and more complicated dataset.
I probably shouldn't have been surprised to learn that the entire thing was handled in an Excel spreadsheet.
Things changed markedly after that crash. TCAS is *always* followed. In a two pilot operation, the flying pilot will follow the TCAS instruction and the monitoring pilot will make a single radio transmission - "TCAS RA" - to inform ATC that they're no longer following their instructions.
The system also supports reversions so if one of the aircraft doesn't follow their TCAS resolution advisory it will change the plan. Most TCAS RAs are a consequence of high rates of climb or descent in the terminal area (aircraft separation is only 1,000ft).
I imagine the reason Heathrow is described as the ideal target is because of the four holding points surrounding the airport. You'd only have to trigger a climb from the lowest aircraft and the whole stack will climb in a sequence of TCAS RAs.
I've had an extended play with one at the Samsung store here in Houston.
- Incredible screen. 120Hz refresh rate is the way forward, I think. Very bright on full brightness but fairly aggressive adaptive brightness when I turned on auto-brightness.
- Despite plastic back it feels well built.
- Guaranteed software updates and Google SafetyNet compatibility unlike some Chinese phones
- Good value for money on the Snapdragon 865.
- Stuff like Dex etc is handy if you might use it
- Despite recent advances, Samsung's Touchwiz / OneUI still stinks. Everything is too big, or too small, and there are duplicate apps for everything littering the phone. Want to uninstall them? Sorry, no.
- This same UI stalled and stuttered from time to time despite the CPU. Opening the Gallery surprised me as thumbnails populated one by one.
- Within 30 seconds of using it the phone was showing me ads and trying to get me to buy stuff in a theme store << this was the deciding factor.
I think it'll be the Pixel 5 for me.
I'm sure it'll work well in the USA. Unfortunately Google have a pretty appalling track record of releasing Pixel features globally* so I doubt anyone in the UK will ever get to try it.
Which is not to say that I'm not tempted as I'm in the last month of a 24 month phone contract. Google Pixel or Samsung S20 FE? Or first iPhone?
* Delayed OS updates outside the USA, Google Duplex, spam call prevention, spam SMS prevention, advanced caller ID, visual voicemail, Live Caption, etc etc.
I think the brain elasticity mentioned in the comment above above is key to this. Despite being a bit of a media yuppy Kevin Warwick managed to demonstrate this with a simple ultra-sonic distance sensor on a baseball cap linked to the simple chip he put in his wrist. After a couple of hours of use he demonstrated instinctive flinching from an object moving towards him while blindfolded.
I think there can be over-heating issues if you paint the whole thing black.
Solar panels block the bulk of light from reaching the satellites, and I guess a pure black material would radiate back into space at not far off the same rate it receives heat.
Fasten a half-decent camera to the top of the satellite and use them as a huge distributed lens is my solution.
I also find it astonishing that sealed cups aren't mandated on all flight decks. Quite apart from spilling your drink over the avionics there's nothing quite as irritating as finding the cup holder sloshing with an inch of someone else's cold coffee following a turbulence encounter.
I bought my own pretentious reusable cup with a lid and Pret label. Interestingly my previous and suspiciously orange employer simply provided lids for the disposable cups.
I have to be honest - my feeling is that the anti-Huawei sentiment in the USA is purely and simply protectionism of the Apple brand. And I still think that.
I did raise an eyebrow at the rhetoric that came out of Huawei / China in the last fortnight over this, in particular the evil-villain "you'll live to regret this" sort of stuff. I appreciate that this sort of flowery language is very much a Far East thing exacerbated by translation into English but it probably didn't help public perception here (we are, after all, a country that is so monumentally stupid a large proportion of people think face masks are an attack on their personal liberties).
Ultimately I think that if China wants to know about vulnerabilities in our telecommunications networks the most reliable way would be to find the person who installed it and hit them with a big spanner until they divulge the details.
The other possibility *dons tinfoil hat* is that Huawei refused to allow GCHQ to install their own backdoors in order to spy on UK residents and citizens.
[Speaking as the owner of a Huawei Mate 20 Pro, nearly two years old now and still demolishing the competition].
Just to clarify this:
All aircraft with underslung engines have a pitch-power couple, and it's either accommodated for by the pilot (737, 747 etc) or by the flight control computers (Airbus, B777, B787 etc). It isn't a problem normally.
The problem is that the "pull" force on the flight controls should increase linearly up to the stall. By mounting the engines so far forward Boeing caused a complicated headache with regard to the aerodynamics on the Max, and as speed reduced in level flight with high angles of attack, the column force *decreased*. This is a very undesirable attribute.
The solution / bodge is MCAS, which would trim forwards in this situation and effectively increase the force required from the pilot to maintain the high angle of attack.
It's not a bork or product placement.
If you can't be bothered to license your software properly though either incompetence, laziness, penny-pinching (or, no doubt, a combination of all three) then you have no-one to blame but yourself.
Don't forget the overwhelming satisfaction back in the day that used to result from replacing a popular hot-linked JPG with another image. It was up to you whether you went with the "Stolen from [insert website name here] or went straight to the Lemming porn.
Which is fine if it's the barristers asking the yes or no questions. But when you have the judge asking a string of questions of which the answer is "sometimes", "possibly", "maybe", then drawing conclusions based on a misunderstanding of the facts, you have a failure of the system.
You might like it to be as straightforward as you describe but it very rarely goes that way.
I was told from a fairly reputable source that after the initial sighting the police launched their own drone (or drones) to see if they could find the perps responsible - or indeed the empty carrier bag that may have been the "drone").
Unfortunately they forgot to tell Gatwick airport this, whose staff kept seeing drones in the airport vicinity and reporting them to the police while holding air traffic indefinitely.
My guess is that the arrest of these two people was to distract from the monumental fuck-up by the police and it's quite rightly been dismissed in Court with compensation offered. I also think it's pretty appalling of the police to have fought this so hard and run up an enormous legal bill that will be settled at the public's expense.
I appreciate that you can't design out poor decision making, but this should have been taken into account in the drone's flight software.
It has three-axis gyro data available, and even a rudimentary architecture should have made the drone fail-over to this inertial positioning when the compass data became erratic and implausible. It doesn't need to know which direction it's going from a magnetic point of view, and I'm surprised that it even takes that into account for primary heading data. Basic stabilisation should, in my opinion, be solely from the IMU.
Magnetic heading can be used to compensate for gyro drift, but I'd have thought derived GPS track is likely more accurate anyway.
Interesting rant. Few problems with it though.
A) Being able to charge my laptop with USB-C means that one charger can do my phone / laptop / iPad.
B) My own laptop has two USB-C ports and a USB-A. Want more USB ports? Get a little USB-C hub, which has the added benefit that it can draw significantly more power than any traditional unpowered hub.
C) Er, why? If I can plug in a USB monitor with one port and either not have to supply power to the laptop, or vice-versa, that's got to be more convenient.
Since USB-C devices and chargers haven't taken to randomly bursting into flames I think your crayon engineering department comment is rubbish. Do you just object to new technology on principle?
From a cold start it takes about 15 minutes to get a 787 up and running. Most of that time, to be fair, is waiting for the inertial reference system to align. The common computing resource (which runs in software what would traditionally be handled by individual avionics computers) is online within 3 minutes. If the CCR is reset in flight (never needed to do so yet...) it's back up and running within 70 seconds. It is permitted to reset both CCRs (left and right) simultaneously in the event of the loss of all displays.
The bulletin for this particular problem is quite woolly - I think that when it says "expired" data it means the results of a calculation that didn't complete in the assigned compute cycle (so realistically milliseconds late); not, say, the values from last Tuesday. Merely a layman on RTOS, was never touched on in my Comp Sci degree.
I have to taken an ECG every other year as part of my job, and after about 10 seconds the machine spits out a trace along with an automated "diagnosis".
The effect that relatively minor things can have on this wretched device is remarkable. So far the list of stuff that screws with the measurement includes my phone; a Garmin Fenix watch; fluorescent lights; LED lights; trains going past; cars starting their engines... in the process the machine spits out guesses which include long QT syndrome, atrial enlargement, ventricle enlargement, various blocks, ectopic beats - you name it, this stupid thing thinks I've got it.
Fortunately the doctor administering the tests is a retired cardiac expert and he just keeps hitting "Retry" until he gets one that he's happy with. Superficially though they all look identical to me, but it doesn't help relax you when you see these things popping up on the screen.
I suppose that potentially if one manufacturer makes shit products that cause problems with other devices, knowing the MAC addresses will help narrow down the cause.
Don't use the Vodafone router if you're unhappy with the data slurping (although as routers go the new one isn't terrible). Vodafone happily gave me the login details to use my own router when I asked.
The 1/10 score seems a little unfair since the whole thing can be taken apart and reassembled without breaking anything. iFixIt made the same complaint about the Pixel 4 ("Display repairs continue to be difficult, requiring complete disassembly of the phone") yet that scores 4/10.
Pinch of salt etc.
Bit of perspective needed here I think.
If you were a customer service rep and you had someone on the line complaining that their SIM card doesn't work, and you send them a replacement SIM and it *still* doesn't work, where would you assume the problem lies?
Interesting that something like this slipped testing, but SIM cards are usually pretty reliable and the true test of VM is how they sort things out going forward.
the only sensible solution now is for all of us to accept what is and try to make the future a bit better by pulling together, rather than pulling ourselves apart and creating the very scenario that people puport to be afraid of.
If I might be so bold, fuck you. The chaos facing the UK is *your* [all those who voted Brexit] problem, not mine. This is not a Famous Five-style jolly in the countryside, as your appallingly dated choice of words implies, but a serious and backward decision made with neither planning nor forethought.
You broke it, you fix it. In the meantime, you can wave your own union flag.
You've got to remember that the 737 is almost impossible to fly in a mis-trim situation. It will take one - possibly both - pilots all their strength just to have the aircraft in a vaguely flyable state.
So you follow the memory items on the stabiliser runaway checklist, then discover that you can't trim manually due to aerodynamic forces on the stabiliser. Rinse and repeat. There's a way of dealing with this situation but it's never been taught to you and removed from the manuals 30 years ago.
How much mental capacity does this leave for troubleshooting? Not much. Despite the adrenaline your physical strength is starting to wane. You try to enable the electrim trim. Even during this brief moment the computer aggressively runs further nose-down trim input and makes the situation worse.
It's a brave person that looks at the available evidence here and gives themselves the role of Judge Judy and executioner,
The 787 is quite interesting from this regard. Many items that used to have their own physical "black box" in the avionics bay are now applications running on one of two common computing resource centres, which are further composed of a number of general purpose modules (they look like blade servers).
Every so often one of these modules will fault and restart, resulting in a temporary loss of a random selection of non-related systems (flight deck displays and some cabin systems are a frequent casualty). The blame seems to be attributed to cosmic rays.
Having said that, they've never *not* come back online after about 30 seconds while I've been flying.
Characterising this sort of Telnet service as a covert backdoor for government spies is a bit like describing your catflap as an access portal that allows multiple species to pass unhindered through a critical home security layer.
Yeah, but if you can reach through the catflap and unlock the door from the inside it's not that secure, is it? Now, you could have a microchip controlled catflap, but all you have to do is hang around for the appropriate passwor-, I mean, cat and stuff it through the flap first.
I think that catflaps should be the new way of describing security problems.
Still on a HG612 modem here which goes into a cheap Tenda mesh network (saves the Chinese government having to get my data from the core network when my system can send it directly to them).
Sky is a PITA though because you need a router that supports MER authentication followed by a Wireshark session to actually get the username and password.
Vodafone user here and actually really happy with the VDSL service (80/20, no problems so far but as per other ISPs their router sucks big time).
I should think that Microsoft would be over the moon if they could bundle Chrome as the default browser in Windows 10. This hasn't happened for various reasons - they wanted a version that could live in their store - but you need to ask yourself: what does Microsoft get out of you using Edgium and why would they invest considerable amounts in making something that's effectively a copy of Chrome if they could have bundled the real thing?
It's not surprising that Bing is the default search provider, but the story is, as usual, more complicated behind the scenes than comes across in a Reg article about MS.
There's a blindingly obvious reason Huawei gets loads of glowing reviews in the few days following the release - they're flying hundreds of people with tech blogs to the launch event and handing them a free flagship.
While El Reg isn't swayed by things like that unless blackjack and hookers are thrown in too, many people are. Even subconsciously, they're aware that it's a freebie and they're keen on getting the next version thrown at them too.
I would guess that if you're tired; you've been walking for a mile or more just to find somewhere to cross the road; your eyesight maybe isn't so good; and you're not a driver so you've not got much experience in judging oncoming traffic speed purely based on the headlights you might make a mistake like this?
Think about the number of people who'll pull out of a side road in front you when driving and force you to brake because they can't interpret your distance from them.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021