I have studied the Cold War and SDI ("Star Wars".)
Russian and US leaders thought that MAD was idiotic - that defending your country against your adversaries was of the highest importance, not retaliating after your capital was in ashes.
That was the motivation for the Moscow ABM ring (still exists) and SDI (the ABM part worked, the lasers didn't.)
MAD is for policy wonks and technocrats, and is not what leaders rely on.
Radio frequency congestion is a major issue in throughput. One of the many issues at La Guardia in NYC is being able to even get a word in to let ATC know you’re ready to taxi. Aircraft are sitting on the ramp waiting to move and in turn aircraft that have landed are waiting to park because the outbound aircraft can’t get out of the way because they can’t get clearance to taxi. It’s a major pain.
Last week I witnessed first hand how enroute frequencies are jammed as well. Flying in and out of Atlanta as severe thunderstorms surrounded the arrival corridor aircraft were diverting everywhere. You could hardly get a word in in time to tell them you were diverting around the storms.
Hopefully CPDLC will alleviate some of this. Something certainly needs to change.
Isn't radio an "old system" ripe for change? The cellular network accommodates millions of users in a space the size of Manhattan. Why do airplanes need to use a channel with such narrow throughput?
Also, voice uses far, far more bandwidth than text.
>And those will be less of a problem after 1/3 of aircraft turn into pumpkins when they "forget" to do the mandatory ADS-B installation this year.
Explain? Are 1/3 of planes not going to get ADS-B installed, and therefore can't fly? Are these commerical planes? If so, are businesses really this incompetent?
Did we read the same article? One of the problems specifically mentioned about old ATC systems is that they rely on voice communication while text messages would be more efficient.
Have a digital frequency for routine communication: like authorization to taxi, take off, clearances, flight plans, pattern requests, confirmations, and traffic. Keep an analog frequency for communicating through emergencies (kind of like Guard).
Sometimes dangerous situations are averted by pilots realising the controller had made an error, like clearing a plane to cross a runway while another is taking off [0]
This kind of thing might be much harder to catch if clearances are given in text, or even impossible if they are routed only to the specific aircraft.
For those unfamiliar, Sully never flew again after the ditching because of "sleep disturbances." His co-pilot did continue flying airlines.
Some pilots were able to successfully do a 180 in a commercial sim and land the plane at the airport.
But the fact that nobody died was celebrated at the time, since a lot of people thought the USA had lost its ability to do anything right after the 2008 recession.
Sully is an important spokesman since he's not affiliated or beholden to any company now.
> Some pilots were able to successfully do a 180 in a commercial sim and land the plane at the airport.
comparisons like this seem entirely wrong.
Just because "some" pilots were able to do a 180 back to LGA doesn't mean that it was the best option at the time given all variables.
There's so many variables you can't account for in a simulator.
At this point I can't imagine there's any ATPL-certified pilot who isn't familiar with US1549. Some pilots have some small knowledge. Some pilots have extensively studied that flight. Most are somewhere in-between. All are going to be prone to choose more risky scenarios because there is no actual jeopardy to their life in the flight simulator.
In addition to all that, we've had over a decade to study and dissect US1549. Sully had seconds, perhaps a minute, to decide on a course of action.
> For those unfamiliar, Sully never flew again after the ditching because of "sleep disturbances." His co-pilot did continue flying airlines.
That's surprising, and very sad, considering how well things turned out.
Wasn't the 180-and-return only possible if the pilot began the turn within something stupid like 10 seconds, and even then only if there was still partial thrust being produced?
The history is that mainly they used well-known CDNs for streaming, followed by their OpenConnect CDN network now. AWS has always been used for metadata.
Actually the pilot anecdote is nonsense. Emergency procedures are part of the procedures you're supposed to be able to execute, typically in a simulator.
A stronger anecdote would be asking an airline pilot to fly an aerobatic maneuver in an airliner like an outside loop or aileron roll.
(There are only a couple of aerobatic maneuvers done in an airliner. For example, when power is stuck at full throttle or the elevator forces the plane to climb, a quarter aileron role can be done for recovery.)
> It's time for the Feds to insist that Boeing return to developing aircraft in an adversarial manner,
Generally speaking, the government cannot maintain a staff of aerospace engineers since they would rapidly fall behind industry engineers, you know, actually building airplanes with current materials.
However, the FAA could pay for engineers to provide oversight and also test pilots. Either group would have caught the MCAS issues.
Most FAA oversight has always been paperwork-related. You don't need to be a pilot to be an FAA employee.
> NoSQL products like DynamoDB, Cassandra, Redis, MongoDB
As a DBA ...
Cassandra is despised. And I would say Postgres is growing a lot faster than MongoDB. Redis caching and zsets power the Internet now.
NoSQL, in general, has a much more limited set of mgmt. tools and has fallen out of favor recently for SoT.
> SQL databases never fall over and are the pinnacle of modern software engineering
Well, RDBMSs almost never fall over when you use SSD and indexes. And they really are the pinnacle of software engineering. Sounds like you're not a DBA.
By default there is no user mapping.