- Feature Articles
- CodeSOD
- Error'd
-
Forums
-
Other Articles
- Random Article
- Alex's Soapbox
- Announcements
- Best of…
- Best of Email
- Best of the Sidebar
- Bring Your Own Code
- Coded Smorgasbord
- Mandatory Fun Day
- Off Topic
- Representative Line
- News Roundup
- Editor's Soapbox
- Software on the Rocks
- Souvenir Potpourri
- Sponsor Post
- Tales from the Interview
- The Daily WTF: Live
- Virtudyne
Admin
Everyone else went back to bed for * * Sleep.Duration * *, so I'm Frist!
Admin
I suppose the maintenance window for the AMeli service were just test numbers, because they go from 01/02/03 to 04/05/06.
Admin
Craig is andros version of Caren
Admin
I thought the 9 month surgery wait times in Canada were bad, turns out it's more than 3 years in France!!
Admin
Yes, also French doctors are known to perform test amputations and test lobotomies.
Admin
And they do it the French way. Half way through the operation the nurses go on strike. After they come back the doctors go for an 2 hour lunch including wine. Then when they come back they go on strike. After that the OR technicians strike. Then it is dinner time and the cooks are ons trike so they have to cook for them selves.
A French man rather strikes his factory bankrupt then that he is passed a raise.
Was signed a very disgruntled Renault Avantime owner. I love the car but repairs and parts are so hard to come by and expensive.
Admin
TRWTF for ameli.fr being, of course, the 4-13 digit password format.
Admin
You know strikes don't happen in a vacuum, right?
FTFY
Admin
Yup. At least they have a reason to use SSNs as ID, since they are Social Security.
Admin
Who can miss such an opportunity to joke at the expense of the French? Nobody. Haha
Admin
France actually has a much smaller loss of productivity due to strikes compared to average developed countries because when they do strike, workers from large unions and social groups usually come together and do a spectacular mess that gets resolved quickly, while in other countries like the USA, countless small strikes go on for extended periods of time, sometimes years, with limited media visibility.
Admin
At least the airport monitors are running on Windows 8 or 10 (I think), and not XP...
Admin
TRWTF is that there are enough people left in Detroit to fill that many departing airplanes.
Admin
Departing from Detroit is one thing, at least you're leaving it behind. What boggles my mind is flights to Detroit. I want to approach the passengers AND crew, look them in the eye and ask, why??!!!!
Admin
"Charlotte Airport is here to remind us all that it's the computers, not the airplanes, that crash,"
Unless it's a Boeing 737 Max with its intentionally defective flight software.
Admin
Since they have the entire year off anyway, I suppose there ain't much productivity to lose.
Admin
Well, the airport in Detroit is very nice.
Admin
It's a hub. What makes you think they leave the airport?
(Also, Detroit Airport is not in Detroit. It's out on the edge of the 'burbs, and they're very different to the city itself.)
Admin
If the abnormal rise lasts more than four hours consult your PC-Doctor.
Admin
The AMELI downtime seems commensurate with the speed at which French public services operate.
Admin
If "1/2/3 - 4/5/6" is test data then I guess the tester is a spotty 16 year old who didn't live through Y2K.....
Admin
"France actually has a much smaller loss of productivity".... could this because in France the difference between "working" and "not working" is so much smaller than in other countries? ;-)
Admin
I think most of the passengers in the Detroit airport are either changing airplanes, or they are going to or from the outer ring of suburbs, in an arc about 50 miles from downtown. (This is where nearly all of the first tier automobile industry suppliers are headquartered now.) I've lived most of my life in northern and southwestern Michigan, and the last two times I came closer than the airport were:
Admin
It could be worse - at least the airplanes themselves don't use Windows for their control system. Yet...
Even so, there have recently been two airline crashes that appear to be partly due to software (and a bad sensor, poorly trained third-world pilots, and an unstable airplane design). The newest version of the Boeing 737 changed to much more efficient high-bypass engines, which need a fan too large in diameter to fit under the wings. So they moved the engines in front of the wings. That caused a stability problem, a hardware problem that they addressed with a software fix - if the airplane pitches up too much, it uses the vertical trim in the tail to bring the nose down. The trouble is, the airplanes have just two sensors for this, one on each side, and in a turn or roll the sensors will disagree. So the software has to take the higher of the two readings because you can't take an average and let the high side stall.
So if one sensor is broken and stuck at the highest reading, this software will keep trimming the tail until it's at maximum nose-down - and if the pilot doesn't override it quickly, the airplane does a power dive into the ground. Pilots are supposed to recognize the trim going nuts (there's a wheel spinning between the pilots' seats to display trim changes) and disable it. Boeing thought no additional training was needed, because even on the first version of the 737, a "runaway trim" malfunction was possible and they were trained to stop it - and just seeing that the trim is wrong and pushing one of the manual trim switches stops runaway trim. It's one of the most intuitive emergency reactions on the airliner, but you have to understand the problem. Apparently these two aircrews took too long to figure it out.
Admin
What's really going to hurt Boeing when this gets into court is that, if I understand it correctly, they cheaped-out twice. The first was not doing an airframe redesign to properly carry those big engines, which might cost a few million for engineering and re-tooling, and tens of millions for the FAA and other national regulators to approve the new design. The second was that they did not make a new angle-of-attack indicator that showed both readings and gave an alarm when the difference between them was too much standard equipment. This is optional equipment, but third-world airlines generally buy the cheapest configuration, with a single indicator that shows the highest reading, and nothing to help the pilot understand that something's wrong with the sensors. (This is a carry-over from normal airplanes, when all a bad sensor will do is shake the stick to falsely warn the pilot of an impending stall - and the pilot chooses whether to believe it and respond.) And so a pilot with less experience or poor training might have believed the sensor and thought that the nose really had to come down to avoid stalling and falling out of the sky, and not had time to realize that it was actually diving out of the sky.