Become a Patron!

To Date which US Presidential candidate will you be voting for & why?

Which US Presidential candidate will you be voting for?

  • Total voters
    237
Status
Not open for further replies.
chopdoc

chopdoc

VU Donator
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
ECF Refugee
hellcatrydr said:
D0d0d2KUwAAoIVE.png
Click to expand...

seal meme.jpeg
 
chopdoc

chopdoc

VU Donator
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
ECF Refugee
Tpat591 said:
Ever hear of something known as a Boeing Uninterruptible Autopilot? If the pilot of MH-370 were alive today he might say it isn't where the plane ended up that matters, so much as how it got there in the first place.
Click to expand...

After 30 years in commercial aviation I have yet to hear anything even close to that.
 
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
chopdoc said:
After 30 years in commercial aviation I have yet to hear anything even close to that.
Click to expand...
Supposedly Mandated after 9-11 but was supposedly being installed on widespread basis prior. Allows remote control of aircraft to be assumed from ground overriding pilot & includes provisions for incapacitation of aircraft occupants in event of hijacking. Was developed after that gulf stream crew & passengers died of asphyxiation & the plane flew itself across the country with chase planes following it until it ran out of fuel hours later & crashed. The concern of it crashing into population areas was enough to get the ball rolling on commandeering the autopilot remotely to direct the planes to land safely or crash in unpopulated areas remotely in event of crew incapacitation.

I cannot verify but Field McConnell talks about it all the time & has posted pictures of unit & system installation summary schematics on AbelDanger website.

Check it out & get back to us with your thoughts. Love to have people debunk these things technically if possible.
 
Last edited:
chopdoc

chopdoc

VU Donator
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
ECF Refugee
Tpat591 said:
Supposedly Mandated after 9-11 but was supposedly being installed on widespread basis prior. Allows remote control of aircraft to be assumed from ground overriding pilot & includes provisions for incapacitation of aircraft occupants. I cannot verify but Field McConnell talks about it all the time & has posted pictures of unit & system on AbelDanger website.

Check it out & get back to us with your thoughts. Love to have people debunk these things technically if possible.
Click to expand...

I cant tell you how many times I had a pilot whine his auto pilot didnt test or did something else and it always turns out to be the dumb shit sitting at the controls could not keep his feet or hands off the controls. The moment it senses any control inputs it decouples as it is designed to do and then the pilot actually has to fly the aircraft.

Autopilots can do lots of neat things. I can program one to fly to an airport, acquire the glide path for a runway I selected, fly the approach all the way down to 50 ft over the runway and then it will maintain 50ft until past the run way at which time it will automatically climb to pattern altitude if it doenst sense any control inputs. Man they can do some real cool shit. But you cant remote control them and that is not a wise idea anyways. Radio static or interference could theoretically cause it to automatically crash and the FAA would never sign off on that. For a drone where the only lives that could be in danger would be pedestrians, the FAA had no choice but to accept the risk but when an aircraft has passengers, the FAA will never take on that liability.
 
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
chopdoc said:
I cant tell you how many times I had a pilot whine his auto pilot didnt test or did something else and it always turns out to be the dumb shit sitting at the controls could not keep his feet or hands off the controls. The moment it senses any control inputs it decouples as it is designed to do and then the pilot actually has to fly the aircraft.

Autopilots can do lots of neat things. I can program one to fly to an airport, acquire the glide path for a runway I selected, fly the approach all the way down to 50 ft over the runway and then it will maintain 50ft until past the run way at which time it will automatically climb to pattern altitude if it doenst sense any control inputs. Man they can do some real cool shit. But you cant remote control them and that is not a wise idea anyways. Radio static or interference could theoretically cause it to automatically crash and the FAA would never sign off on that. For a drone where the only lives that could be in danger would be pedestrians, the FAA had no choice but to accept the risk but when an aircraft has passengers, the FAA will never take on that liability.
Click to expand...
And how tough would it be to have a mode in that autopilot that could disconnect that pilot override normal operating mode remotely on a signal from the ground in event of hijacking & direct it to land it safely instead of executing a missed approach @ 50' above ground. Would the powers that be be motivated to implement such a mode as a contingency and not tell anyone about it? Technically, it is possible, right?

Would it be considered a worthwhile emergency implementation to pursue after 9-11 by authorities? That change could probably be implemented with a simple software update (*except for the incapacitation gas canister part that is). The technicians installing the software update might never even realize the change was there.
 
Last edited:
Rossum

Rossum

Gold Contributor
Member For 3 Years
Tpat591 said:
And how tough would it be to have a mode in that autopilot that could disconnect that pilot override normal operating mode remotely on a signal from the ground in event of hijacking & direct it to land it safely instead of executing a missed approach @ 50' above ground.
Click to expand...
On an Airbus, where the controls are strictly fly-by-wire, it's entirely conceivable.

On a Boeing, where the controls are still mechanical/hydraulic, not so much.

If it's not a Boeing, I'm not going! :p
 
chopdoc

chopdoc

VU Donator
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
ECF Refugee
Tpat591 said:
And how tough would it be to have a mode in that autopilot that could disconnect that pilot override normal operating mode remotely on a signal from the ground in event of hijacking & direct it to land it safely instead of executing a missed approach @ 50' above ground. Would the powers that be be motivated to implement such a mode as a contingency and not tell anyone about it? Technically, it is possible, right?

Would it be considered a worthwhile emergency implementation to pursue after 9-11 by authorities? That change could probably be implemented with a simple software update (*except for the incapacitation gas canister part that is). The technicians installing the software update might never even realize the change was there.
Click to expand...

Anything is possible. Artificial gravity is possible. We just havent developed the technology for it yet. But you have to take into consideration some extremely points. Computers fly planes. That's how autopilot works. Yet would you want to board a flight knowing the control of the aircraft can be taken at anytime remotely? If your the owner of that aircraft, would you want to take on the liability such a system would offer?

As I said, anything is possible and remotely controlling an aircraft has always been possible. The real question is if there is any demand for such a feature? It would be all an airline would need is for someone to remotely hack an airplane and take it for a joy ride with 200+ passengers on it. That would bankrupt them and they know it. So far I have heard nothing on it. I been out of the game for a couple years now but I talk with my friends who still are in aviation and I heard nothing on it being developed.
 
chopdoc

chopdoc

VU Donator
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
ECF Refugee
Rossum said:
On an Airbus, where the controls are strictly fly-by-wire, it's entirely conceivable.

On a Boeing, where the controls are still mechanical/hydraulic, not so much.

If it's not a Boeing, I'm not going! :p
Click to expand...

Actually, it will work on any aircraft with an autopilot installed.
 
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
chopdoc said:
Anything is possible. Artificial gravity is possible. We just havent developed the technology for it yet. But you have to take into consideration some extremely points. Computers fly planes. That's how autopilot works. Yet would you want to board a flight knowing the control of the aircraft can be taken at anytime remotely? If your the owner of that aircraft, would you want to take on the liability such a system would offer?

As I said, anything is possible and remotely controlling an aircraft has always been possible. The real question is if there is any demand for such a feature? It would be all an airline would need is for someone to remotely hack an airplane and take it for a joy ride with 200+ passengers on it. That would bankrupt them and they know it. So far I have heard nothing on it. I been out of the game for a couple years now but I talk with my friends who still are in aviation and I heard nothing on it being developed.
Click to expand...
Again Field McConnell is the one saying they developed it in they mid to late 80s after that runaway gulf stream incident & it became fully mandated on all commercial aircraft after 9-11 & it supposedly highly classified so as to avoid hackers due to ignorance of it's existence. It is also supposedly why we were having such a large incidence of military aircraft crashes over last few years as HRC & BHO sold it to the Russians & Chinese along with most of our Advanced Technology Classified Military programs. It is how the Russians disabled our Agis system on the destroyer in the black sea & the Chinese caused the collisions of the Fitzgerald & the McCain (they were hacked).

As far as anti gravity goes do a search for the Hutchinson effect. It is not a question of if we have developed the technology for it, but if we have declassified it yet. Black projects are 50 years ahead of what has been released. Space Force is merely an effort by the Trump Administration to declassify already existing black budget SSP programs at a pace the public can digest. The USA discontinued the Shuttle program because it was a costly, long obsolete system that was really only for public & international consumption. The TR3B has existed since the early - mid 60's in design - Late 60s - early 70s in development. That is all but officially admitted publicly & common knowledge now. Openly & regularly discussed by anonymous sources. It is probably approaching obsolescence today.
 
Last edited:
Rossum

Rossum

Gold Contributor
Member For 3 Years
chopdoc said:
Actually, it will work on any aircraft with an autopilot installed.
Click to expand...
Depends what you mean by "will work".

With the mechanical / hydraulic controls found in a Boeing, a pilot could fight it, and would certainly be aware that the autopilot had not relinquished control.

However, with the fly-by-wire controls found in an Airbus, a pilot could not. Heck, the guy in the left seat of an Airbus can't even feel what they guy in the right seat is doing with the stick (and vice-versa)...
 
chopdoc

chopdoc

VU Donator
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
ECF Refugee
Tpat591 said:
Again Field McConnell is the one saying they developed it in they mid to late 80s after that runaway gulf stream incident & it became fully mandated on all commercial aircraft after 9-11 & it supposedly highly classified so as to avoid hackers due to ignorance of it's existence. It is also supposedly why we were having such a large incidence of military aircraft crashes over last few years as HRC & BHO sold it to the Russians & Chinese along with most of our Advanced Technology Classified Military programs. It is how the Russians disabled our Agis system on the destroyer in the black sea & the Chinese caused the collisions of the Fitzgerald & the McCain (they were hacked).

As far as anti gravity goes do a search for the Hutchinson effect. It is not a question of if we have developed the technology for it, but if we have declassified it yet. Black projects are 50 years ahead of what has been released. Space Force is merely an effort by the Trump Administration to declassify already existing black budget SSP programs at a pace the public can digest. The USA discontinued the Shuttle program because it was a costly, long obsolete system that was really only for public & international consumption. The TR3B has existed since the early - mid 60's in design - Late 60s - early 70s in development. That is all but officially admitted publicly & common knowledge now. Openly & regularly discussed by anonymous sources. It is probably approaching obsolescence today.
Click to expand...

Field McConnell might know all about it but I can say almost with %99 certainty that this technology is not being used in commercial aviation. There would be no way they could install a system like this without it being all over the mechanics grape vine.

I been keeping up what I can with the moon colony projects. Been reading all I can find on it and one of the things mentioned a few times was about gravity. They have yet to develop a way to even measure gravity. Now if the military has such technology then that will be a huge help to conquering space. The way I been seeing it is that the scientist dont know how to replicate gravity yet but with a moon colony and commercialization on the moon there is going to be manned space flights back and forth to the moon so innovation will lead the space technology revolution that will take place and before long, maybe not in my life time but within a hundred years man kind will discover artificial gravity and then space flight will become more and more common until we are pushing out of our solar system and exploring others.
 
chopdoc

chopdoc

VU Donator
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
ECF Refugee
Rossum said:
Depends what you mean by "will work".

With the mechanical / hydraulic controls found in a Boeing, a pilot could fight it, and would certainly be aware that the autopilot had not relinquished control.

However, with the fly-by-wire controls found in an Airbus, a pilot could not. Heck, the guy in the left seat of an Airbus can't even feel what they guy in the right seat is doing with the stick (and vice-versa)...
Click to expand...

What I was thinking is in that type of system, the autopilot conrols the hydraulics and theoretically can take over the aircraft.
 
akpostal

akpostal

Bronze Contributor
Member For 1 Year
Status
Not open for further replies.

VU Sponsors

Top