I hear all the "teething problems" excuses but this is really shoddy design, shoddy manufacturing procedures, and/or shoddy QC. I deal with lots of equipment that carries virtually no life safety risks at all. It is pretty common practice to make things like wiring connections idiotproof. Sensor 1 has a four prong connector, sensor 2 has a 6 prong connector (even though they are only two wire sensors). That sort of thing. I realize that there are probably 10s of thousands of wiring terminations on a 787 and only so many ways to key them. But beyond that, wouldn't you expect that there is a routine function check for something like this as part of quality control? Again, much lower risk equipment I deal with gets checked thoroughly - input 101 turns on, output 201 must turn on and activate device 301. The rule is if it's possible to connect it wrong, then you check to verify that it is connected right. Period. And that's for machines that just make plastic doodads. Factory engineering te
"her employment contract"
I assume, based on all the sympathy for the poor contractor in this case, that she was forced to sign that contract at gunpoint or something. Surely if she knew the terms of the contract she would never have signed it willingly. Terrible thing to do to a person, forcing them to sign such a horrible contract.
At ATL, they added a taxiway that goes around the end of 26L at a lower elevation than the runway. Landing aircraft taxi around that loop without waiting for departing aircraft which often pass directly over them. But it's accessed from the taxiway in between the two runways. I don't know if that is part of the plan at LAX or even possible there. It makes for a long arrival taxi when using 8L instead of 26R but when 8R is busy, it probably still saves lots of time for arrivals.
That is correct for Hartsfield, my home airport. The spot they describe is beyond security checkpoints. Don't know about JFK but probably the same. At ATL, if you want to hang outside and watch some ops while waiting to pick somebody up, you can go to the cell phone lots which are pretty close to a runway and outdoors, of course. Open to the public an time for as long as you wish to hang out there.
I don't know you Karl or what your qualifications are to comment on the crew's action. Given that they were apparently flying at low altitude already, reducing power and permitting the vehicle to seek its own level seems ill advised. He added power and tried to climb out of the turbulence. Commercial airlines do that all the time. I don't think he was trying to "counter act the turbulence". He was trying to climb to an altitude above it which seems totally reasonable since terrain was causing the turbulence.
People kill me with their yearning for the "good old days" of air travel. The legacy experience is still available. You just have to pay an old fashioned fare to get it. Buy a first class ticket and get the genteel experience you crave.
Haven't flow much lately have you. Most boarding passes are printed by the passenger on their own printer at home or at the office prior to going to the airport. At the airport, boarding passes are printed by thermal printers on flimsy paper at the self check in kiosks. And at many airports, you don't need a printed pass at all. Just an image of a boarding pass, displayed on the screen of your smart phone, will get you through security. (Those are scanned by a device at the security check point and I am not knowledgeable about exactly what that scan checks. I assume that it checks the image against a database of legitimate boarding passes issued by the airlines, but I don't know that. There is no human involvement in the process.) Your are correct that a fake pass should, and will, be detected at the gate (without a magnetic strip, just by validating against a list of checked in passengers or something). What the fake pass does is get a person into the "sterile" area of an airport witho