OK, here's a mega controversial subject -- How many Pics would it have taken
to save JFK Jr. if his accident was caused by losing control of his
aircraft?
NASA's answer to an out of control airplane is a parachute!(?)
How many folks here doubt that the ability to sense attitude, accelerations,
heights, etc. would allow us to grab control of an aircraft and keep it
within normal operating parameters? The poor fellow was riding in a $300,000
vehicle so cost is not an issue. Yeah, I know that more complexity equals
lower reliability, but we have known for decades that regularly occuring
pilot reactions to obscured vision will absolutely cause a crash. News
reports have stated that pilots are taught to ignore what their eyes, inner
ears and seat of the pants are telling them and pay attention to the
instruments. Why can't the instruments pay attention to the instruments?
I'm proud when we can use this power to apply microcontrollers to better
lives and ashamed when we miss an opportunity to save them.
>OK, here's a mega controversial subject -- How many Pics would it have taken
>to save JFK Jr. if his accident was caused by losing control of his
>aircraft?
They have to be able to read their own ROMs, so we're into the high-end
PICs now.
>reports have stated that pilots are taught to ignore what their eyes, inner
>ears and seat of the pants are telling them and pay attention to the
>instruments. Why can't the instruments pay attention to the instruments?
But he didn't have an instrument rating - he was still a green pilot. So
he's going to make mistakes. Unfortunately, he killed two other people in
the process.
tmariner wrote:
> instruments. Why can't the instruments pay attention to the instruments?
They already can and do until you tell them not to. That
plane had an autopilot capable of landing the plane. There
was either mechanical failure, or more likely he turned it
off because what it was doing didn't seem 'right'.. At 100
total hours (most people take 50 just to get a license) he
had no business with passengers at night in a complex
aircraft (flaps, retractable gear, variable pitch prop) with
so little experience. At least to give him some credit, he
had planned to leave 1 hour earlier and his wife's sister
was late. All boils down to confidence != experience
though. Not like it matters now.
I feel a better question is how many PICs would it take to crash an
airplane? The answer - just 1.
Newer planes have exactly such systems. However there is controversy over
whether such systems save life or simply put more in jeopardy. The problem
is not computer error (with enough testing errors can be eliminated) it's
pilot error.
I believe it's 707s that have such a system. If the pilot attempts what
the
computer considers to be a dangerous move, it will override him. I am aware
of at least 2 seperate incidents where this has caused an accident.
One situation was as follows:
After taking off the pilot was too low with too little power. The pilot
realised this and pulled up. Unfortunately he pulled up a bit too hard.
The
computer decided that pulling up so hard with so little power was a bad
idea. So, it took over and didn't allow him to rise so sharply. The
pilot
suddenly finds the controls are trying to fight him. So what does he
do, he
panics and pulls up harder. So what does the plane do, it resists
harder.
Result: plane hits the ground, passengers die.
Who was in the wrong? No one. The pilot really shouldn't have pulled up
quite so hard so the computer was right. Yet, pulling up so hard would most
probably not have caused an accident had he then levelled off.
IMHO, the problem is not with the computers it's with the pilots. It's easy
to reprogram a computer. It's much harder to reprogram a person.
At 01:00 AM 7/23/99 EDT, you wrote:
>In a message dated 7/22/99 9:52:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>.....tomKILLspam.....PSY.UNSW.EDU.AU writes:
>
>> I feel a better question is how many PICs would it take to crash an
>> airplane? The answer - just 1.
>
>Ok, then how many PICs does it take to change a light bulb?
Er, how many light bulbs can you change with a PIC?
I don't know about you, but if it was me that drove a plane into the sea I would probably still be there. :-]
I also don't understand all of the fuss. What has this guy done for all of the millions of "mourners?" Other than the fact that this guy is the son of a respected president and a successful businessman?
It just enforces my belief that many people are lemmings! :-)
>I feel a better question is how many PICs would it take to crash an
>airplane? The answer - just 1.
> I also don't understand all of the fuss. What has this guy done for all of
> the millions of "mourners?" Other than the fact that this guy is the son
of
> a respected president and a successful businessman?
Man, you hit the nail RIGHT on the head! Everywhere I look (especially on
AOL) I see, "Remembering JFK Jr. -- share your thoughts." It's weird.
Not a fuss, just another personality that could (and did) appeared at
the front page of several magazines. The real fuss was to a certain
princess. I believe that people need some personalities to make them
bigger, every group would mourn its dead idols. Elvis was an example. In
real we need somebody to admire, to light our way, to be an example of
what we could be if things were different. When that admired figure
dies, somehow we feel as our hope was stolen, we die a little bit
together.
Want a better example? take a look at two thousands years ago.
Wagner
>
> In a message dated 7/22/99 10:51:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> @spam@cpbrightKILLspamIONET.NET writes:
>
> > I also don't understand all of the fuss. What has this guy done for all of
> > the millions of "mourners?" Other than the fact that this guy is the son
> of
> > a respected president and a successful businessman?
>
> Man, you hit the nail RIGHT on the head! Everywhere I look (especially on
> AOL) I see, "Remembering JFK Jr. -- share your thoughts." It's weird.
>
> Tim H.
Here in Australia it has been front page news for four days now. The papers
have been devoting pages and pages to it. Meanwhile the letters to the
editor have been complaining about the excessive coverage. I thought we got
the mass media we deserved. Isn't that what we are told when we complain
about the quality of journalism in newspapers and on TV. Could it be the man
in the street does not control the content in the media. Could it be the
media barons actually decide how high or low the quality of mass media is.
At least we still have the internet. Don't we ?
At 03:01 23/07/99 -0400, you wrote:
>At 02:32 AM 7/23/99 -0400, you wrote:
>>Want a better example? take a look at two thousands years ago.
>>Wagner
>
>Wagner, you ARE asking for it!
>
>Christ was PUT to death for what he did and taught. He didn't simply die in
>a tragic accident and become idolized in death.
>
>Sean
>
And so was JFK!
P.S
Christ was not put to death for what he did and tought (Crusifiction,
actually was not death, stavation and exposure was, and only the gards
(Whom often left) where there to stop those crusified from being rescued,
one could argue that it actually was fear that stoped other citizens from
doing this), but for what he stood for and the loss of power and control
that Pilot thought he represented.
(Waiting for the flames on that one)
>Not a fuss, just another personality that could (and did) appeared at
>the front page of several magazines. The real fuss was to a certain
>princess. I believe that people need some personalities to make them
>bigger, every group would mourn its dead idols. Elvis was an example. In
>real we need somebody to admire, to light our way, to be an example of
>what we could be if things were different. When that admired figure
>dies, somehow we feel as our hope was stolen, we die a little bit
>together.
>Want a better example? take a look at two thousands years ago.
>Wagner
>
>Tim Hamel wrote:
>>
>> In a message dated 7/22/99 10:51:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>> RemoveMEcpbrightTakeThisOuTIONET.NET writes:
>>
>> > I also don't understand all of the fuss. What has this guy done for all
>>Christ was PUT to death for what he did and taught. He didn't simply die in
>>a tragic accident and become idolized in death.
<snip>
>P.S
>Christ was not put to death for what he did and tought (Crusifiction,
>actually was not death, stavation and exposure was, and only the gards
>(Whom often left) where there to stop those crusified from being rescued,
>one could argue that it actually was fear that stoped other citizens from
>doing this), but for what he stood for and the loss of power and control
>that Pilot thought he represented.
>(Waiting for the flames on that one)
Actually, Christ GAVE his life. It was not taken from him. Voluntarily.
Mark 15:37,39
And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried
out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.
John 10:17
Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life,
that I might take it again.
I John 3:16a
Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us:
John 15:13
Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his
friends.
I could find others, but these make the point I think.
Yep ! And to add frosting to the cake, if you ask one of the mourners ( who
probably never knew JFK Jr. existed until he died ) what all the fuss is
about, they'll probably tell you your an insensitve jerk <g>. A guy at
work said "Ok, so they bring his body up, then bury him at sea ????? They
could have saved a lot of money by just leaving him be."
Eric
On Friday, July 23, 1999 1:07 AM, Tim Hamel [SMTP:RemoveMEIMDNICE12TakeThisOuTAOL.COM] wrote:
> In a message dated 7/22/99 10:51:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> cpbrightEraseME.....IONET.NET writes:
>
> > I also don't understand all of the fuss. What has this guy done for
all of
> > the millions of "mourners?" Other than the fact that this guy is the
son
> of
> > a respected president and a successful businessman?
>
> Man, you hit the nail RIGHT on the head! Everywhere I look (especially on
> AOL) I see, "Remembering JFK Jr. -- share your thoughts." It's weird.
>
> Tim H.
>"Ok, so they bring his body up, then bury him at sea ????? They
>could have saved a lot of money by just leaving him be."
There was an autopsy in between recovery and burial.
Also a cremation I believe.
The former is a near essential requirement in the death of any
Kennedy due to past history and the inevitable conspiracy theorists
(and the real possibility of a real conspiracy).
Also, recovery of the body provides much needed "closure" for those
who genuinely care.
Obviously, I realize this. Hadn't considered the conspiracy issue but I
wouldn't think the Kennedy's would really care about cost under any
circumstances. It's just the irony of removing someone from an effective
burial at sea so that he can be buried at sea <s>.
As far as closure, personally, just finding and knowing would be enough.
Eric
>There was an autopsy in between recovery and burial.
>Also a cremation I believe.
>The former is a near essential requirement in the death of any
>Kennedy due to past history and the inevitable conspiracy theorists
>(and the real possibility of a real conspiracy).
>Also, recovery of the body provides much needed "closure" for those
>who genuinely care.
Russell McMahon wrote:
>
> >"Ok, so they bring his body up, then bury him at sea ????? They
> >could have saved a lot of money by just leaving him be."
>
> There was an autopsy in between recovery and burial.
They will probably come to the conclusion, that the last
thing that flashed throught his mind, was his ass.
> Also a cremation I believe.
>
> The former is a near essential requirement in the death of any
> Kennedy due to past history and the inevitable conspiracy theorists
> (and the real possibility of a real conspiracy).
Hehehe. I can't wait. Maybe it had something to do
with Diana's death? Or Tutankamen's? I am looking
forward to not seeing Oliver Stone's movie version.
--
Friendly Regards /"\
\ /
Tjaart van der Walt X ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN EraseMEtjaartcellpt.co.za / \ AGAINST HTML MAIL
|--------------------------------------------------|
| GSM Technology for Positioning and Telematics |
| Cellpoint Systems SA http://www.cellpt.com |
| http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/index.html |
| WGS84 -26.0124 +28.1129 Voice +27 (0)11 2545100 |
|--------------------------------------------------|
Tjaart van der Walt wrote:
>
> Russell McMahon wrote:
> >
> > >"Ok, so they bring his body up, then bury him at sea ????? They
> > >could have saved a lot of money by just leaving him be."
> >
> > There was an autopsy in between recovery and burial.
> They will probably come to the conclusion, that the last
> thing that flashed throught his mind, was his ass.
ooh you meanie Tijaart !
kinda like Freddy Mercury pushing up roses instead of _____.
At 11:25 PM 7/23/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Obviously, I realize this. Hadn't considered the conspiracy issue but I
>wouldn't think the Kennedy's would really care about cost under any
>circumstances. It's just the irony of removing someone from an effective
Especially since We The People are paying for it all. Even the funeral!
1. >>Ok, then how many PICs does it take to change a light bulb?
2. >Er, how many light bulbs can you change with a PIC?
If 1 or 2 is the right question depends on if you let the PIC's get
programmed by M$ programmers or by some linux freaks :)
===================================================================
Kraft Bernhard aka. Krufti /"\
ICQ# 3672982 \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
X AGAINST HTML MAIL
/ \
===================================================================
> Obviously, I realize this. Hadn't considered the conspiracy issue
> but I wouldn't think the Kennedy's would really care about cost
> under any circumstances. It's just the irony of removing someone
> from an effective burial at sea so that he can be buried at sea <s>.
On a usenet newsgroup I frequent, they've taken to calling it the
'Kennedy family catch and release program'.
-Ansel
--
Would you please explain what you are being incoherent about?
-John Woodgate
> On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, Matthew Fries wrote:
> 2. >Er, how many light bulbs can you change with a PIC?
Bernhard Kraft then wrote:
> If 1 or 2 is the right question depends on if you let the PIC's get
> programmed by M$ programmers or by some linux freaks :)
Since when does PIC source code's quality seriously relate to the
programmer's operating system ? People love to form mobs, almost
exactly like sheep. Your put down of Linux users as freaks
demonstrates your unease at dealing with unfamiliar technology by
putting the Linux confident group into your out group category.
Graham Daniel.
On Saturday, July 24, 1999 12:27 PM, Bernhard Kraft [SMTP:RemoveMEkraftbKILLspamAON.AT] wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, Matthew Fries wrote:
>
> 1. >>Ok, then how many PICs does it take to change a light bulb?
>
> 2. >Er, how many light bulbs can you change with a PIC?
>
> If 1 or 2 is the right question depends on if you let the PIC's get
> programmed by M$ programmers or by some linux freaks :)
Er, I believe the correct term is Linux wankers and wanna be's <g>.
> At 11:25 PM 7/23/99 -0500, you wrote:
> >Obviously, I realize this. Hadn't considered the conspiracy issue but I
> >wouldn't think the Kennedy's would really care about cost under any
> >circumstances. It's just the irony of removing someone from an effective
>
> Especially since We The People are paying for it all. Even the funeral!
>
> Andy
>
> ==================================================================
> Andy Kunz Life is what we do to prepare for Eternity
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> spamBeGoneandySTOPspamEraseMErc-hydros.comhttp://www.rc-hydros.com - Race Boats
> KILLspamandyspamBeGonemontanadesign.comhttp://www.montanadesign.com - Electronics
> ==================================================================
I think he is referring to the use of U.S. Coast Guard and Navy vessels for
the burial at sea.
Sean
At 09:06 PM 7/24/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Really ? Why is that ? When I die, can I expect the same treatment <g> ?
>
>
>On Saturday, July 24, 1999 9:38 AM, Andy Kunz
[SMTP:EraseMEsupportEraseMEMONTANADESIGN.COM] wrote: {Quote hidden}
>> At 11:25 PM 7/23/99 -0500, you wrote:
>> >Obviously, I realize this. Hadn't considered the conspiracy issue but I
>> >wouldn't think the Kennedy's would really care about cost under any
>> >circumstances. It's just the irony of removing someone from an effective
>>
>> Especially since We The People are paying for it all. Even the funeral!
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> ==================================================================
>> Andy Kunz Life is what we do to prepare for Eternity
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> @spam@andy@spam@spam_OUTrc-hydros.comhttp://www.rc-hydros.com - Race Boats
>> spamBeGoneandyKILLspammontanadesign.comhttp://www.montanadesign.com - Electronics
>> ==================================================================
>
|
How many PIC's would have it taken to save JFK Sr.? I don't know but
it would have been worth it. It could have saved the lives of 50,000
military personnel and associated burial expenses. JFK Sr. was the
first Viet Nam War protester.
There was talk of burying JFK Jr. at Arlington National Cemetery. That
probably would have cost more. If you want (expect) a military funeral
but aren't entitled, it would help to get on the good side of a U.S.
Congressman. Try campaign contributions or volunteer work.
There are basically two kinds of politicians. The kind that do what is
best for the people (all), the economy, the environment, the rest of the
world. The other kind of politician is selfish. Everything they do is
for personal wealth, power or to get reelected. They may make headlines
with a 792 billion tax cut but lower income people will only get 1% and
it's all a sham and waste of valuable time because they want it vetoed.
>
> I think he is referring to the use of U.S. Coast Guard and Navy vessels for
> the burial at sea.
>
> Sean
>
> At 09:06 PM 7/24/99 -0500, you wrote:
> >Really ? Why is that ? When I die, can I expect the same treatment <g> ?
> >
> >
> >On Saturday, July 24, 1999 9:38 AM, Andy Kunz
> [SMTP:TakeThisOuTsupport.....TakeThisOuTMONTANADESIGN.COM] wrote:
> >> At 11:25 PM 7/23/99 -0500, you wrote:
> >> >Obviously, I realize this. Hadn't considered the conspiracy issue but I
> >> >wouldn't think the Kennedy's would really care about cost under any
> >> >circumstances. It's just the irony of removing someone from an effective
> >>
> >> Especially since We The People are paying for it all. Even the funeral!
> >>
> >> Andy
> >>
> >> ==================================================================
> >> Andy Kunz Life is what we do to prepare for Eternity
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> TakeThisOuTandyKILLspamspamrc-hydros.comhttp://www.rc-hydros.com - Race Boats
> >> .....andyRemoveMEmontanadesign.comhttp://www.montanadesign.com - Electronics
> >> ==================================================================
> >
> |
> | Sean Breheny
> | Amateur Radio Callsign: KA3YXM
> | Electrical Engineering Student
> \--------------=----------------
> Save lives, please look at http://www.all.org
> Personal page: http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/shb7
> RemoveMEshb7spamBeGonecornell.edu ICQ #: 3329174
> ________________________________________________________
> NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet. Shouldn't you?
> Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
> http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
>
> At 02:34 AM 7/25/99 -0600, you wrote:
> >How many PIC's would have it taken to save JFK Sr.?
>
> Just one. Use it as a fire control circuit for the rifle that fired the
> bullet that killed him.
>
> Oh, and don't forget to enable the WDT. :)
>
> Remove the BALONEY from my email address.
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Matthew Fries Minneapolis, MN USA
> TakeThisOuTfreezespambaloneyvisi.com
>
> "Quit eating all my *STUFF*!" - The Tick
We're sorta way OT here, guys - This isn't the Philosophy and Religion
mailing list, a Sadism & Torture mailing list, nor a Gossip mailing
list. Nor a Debate mailing list. Methinks it's time to kill the
thread, folks.
At 11:46 AM 7/26/99 -0700, you wrote:
>We're sorta way OT here, guys - This isn't the Philosophy and Religion
>mailing list, a Sadism & Torture mailing list, nor a Gossip mailing
>list. Nor a Debate mailing list. Methinks it's time to kill the
>thread, folks.
rc-hydros.com http://www.rc-hydros.com - Race Boats
