Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | V99's commentslogin

When all you have is AI everything looks like a model, but this is trivially done with basic text parsing...

This info is in the automated weather broadcast (ATIS) audio for any towered airport.

Most large airports provide a textual version (D-ATIS), so suitably equipped pilots don't have to listen to it and scribble it down.

E.g. Heathrow now from random unofficial website: https://atis.guru/atis/EGLL

EGLL ARR ATIS T 1820Z LANDING RWY 27L…

EGLL DEP ATIS U 1427Z PILOTS ARE EXPECTED TO CHANGE TO RWY 27R AT AT 15:00 HOURS… DEPARTURE RWY 27L…


If you don't go often enough you definitely won't make the same progress per session. You'll spend most of each session trying to remaster what you lost from the last one.

For powered flying, one a week is already on the low end... most instructors would recommend 2-3x/week.

Flying skills are very perishable, especially when first learning. This is why there are several different rules about recency of experience before you can do things like carry passengers, recurrent training requirements, etc.


I didn't realize the skills were so perishable, but once you point it out it seems obvious. Since you also mentioned powered flying, and since I imagine there are a lot of transferable skills, do people commonly learn both?

The suggested filtering is just creating a new problem of assuming a 16:10 safe area exists (and external displays or other shapes don't).

Group all resolutions returned that are the same +-5% together and choose the lowest one in the desired bucket.


Testing on the ground and problems with what most people would call the payload (Apollo 1 & 13), sure.

But we're comparing to SpaceX launches. Plenty of Raptor engines have blown up on the ground too.

There were 13 Saturn V's launched and all of them basically performed their mission (Apollo 6 being a bit of an exception) with 0 rapid unplanned disassemblies...


Here's a couch from a retail store you've probably heard of that you can configure online for $12k.

https://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/bedford-sofa-uphols...

Personally I'd rather buy one from IKEA and use the change left over from $12k to buy.. a used truck to drive the sofa home in.. but apparently there's a market.

You can certainly go much higher for smaller companies producing actual custom stuff, using exotic materials, for a giant sectional instead of a single sofa, etc.


TIL that Williams Sonoma sells furniture. I thought they only sold kitchen appliances, pots and pans, etc.


Thanks! I haven't heard of that store, and their website seems to be geoblocked in my region.


True... `strace bash -c cat` would give more the series of stat calls they're intending to see:

newfstatat(AT_FDCWD, ".", {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0700, st_size=4096, ...}, 0) = 0

newfstatat(AT_FDCWD, "/usr/local/sbin/cat", 0x7fffcec2f3b8, 0) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)

newfstatat(AT_FDCWD, "/usr/local/bin/cat", 0x7fffcec2f3b8, 0) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)

newfstatat(AT_FDCWD, "/usr/sbin/cat", 0x7fffcec2f3b8, 0) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)

newfstatat(AT_FDCWD, "/usr/bin/cat", {st_mode=S_IFREG|0755, st_size=68536, ...}, 0) = 0


You are NOT at all (legally) free to arbitrarily turn off your ADSB on an aircraft equipped with it. 91.225(f) [1].

> Except as prohibited in [unmanned aircraft section], each person operating an aircraft equipped with ADS-B Out must operate this equipment in the transmit mode at all times unless [authorized by FAA or ATC].

A common way to add ADSB to an aircraft not originally equipped is replacing one of the lights with a uAvionics skyBeacon[2], which has a LED light + ADSB-out transmitter. So the nav light switch would control it, but you'd also now be required to have them on at all times.

[1]: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/part-91/section-91.225...

[2]: https://uavionix.com/products/skybeacon/


There's a whole world outside the USA which does not follow FAA regulations. I, flying an unpowered glider, turn mine on only when I need a clearance.


That's nice, but the parent explicitly cited part of US regulations where it's required, while ignoring that it's always required if equipped.


> There's a whole world outside the USA

What do you mean?


Can’t see past the wall?


Yes the FAA can issue what are called Airworthiness Directives and require an issue be resolved in the timeframe and manner they specify.

The timeframe could be anything, but common forms are like:

- Within the next X (flight) hours or Y calendar days

- You don't have to, but additional inspection needed every X hours or Y days until you do

- At next annual inspection

- Immediate/before flying again (usually called an Emergency AD)


I know the FAA can, I was referring to the manufacture. If Boeing makes a software patch do they have any way of forcing everyone to install it other than asking the FAA to issue a directive?


They might be able to, but, if they are effectively saying "our product is broken and you can't use it until you do X" they could be responsible for massive contractual liabilities.


Based on what legal reasoning…?

I haven’t heard of any similar successful court cases in recent years in the US.


Based on aviation law they can notify the certification authority of a mandatory fix which will be then required to be applied for users to aircraft operators to apply. If necessary with 0 deadline, i.e. "if the plane is on the ground it's not flying till the following change is applied"


Can you cite which parts of “aviation law” could have a decent chance of leading to the aformentioned outcome?


General worldwide: Chicago Convention aka ICAO convention (currently under auspices of UN), Annex 8 [2] and Annex 6 [3].

For USA [4], Title 14 of Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter I Subchapter C, Part 39

For EU [5] Article 76 (6) of the Basic Regulation (EU) 2018/1139

[1] https://www.icao.int/publications/pages/doc7300.aspx [2] https://ffac.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ICAO-Annex-8-Airw... [3] https://ffac.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ICAO-Annex-6-Oper... [4] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-C... [5] https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/document-library/regulations#b...


AFAIK, no.

I read through the 787 Dreamliner manual for setting up the software for patch distribution to the planes, and there are checks and overrides at every step. The whole thing is physically controlled by the owning airline or maybe the leasing company, but not Boeing.


That sounds smart.

I wasn’t thinking a “we’re pushing an update too bad” kind of thing but more a “hey you have to do this to be allowed to fly, your choice” with the weight of law behind it.


That guide book was genuinely amazing, it was easily the best-written technical document of any kind that I had read.

The security is dialed up to 11 as well. It explicitly calls out the following scenario:

1) The plane is leased. 2) the maintenance is outsourced. 3) The plane at an airport in an "unfriendly" country. 4) The plane is not allowed to take off until it is patched due to an emergency directive.

That scenario is handled, securely!

There is encryption between the plane and the airport WiFi.

The maintenance crew can also plug in to an Ethernet port near the front landing gear.

There is a VPN back to the patch server managed by the airline.

The VPN host certificate is explicitly whitelisted in the plane.

The plane won't accept a patch unless it has been digitally signed by Boeing, the FAA, the Airline, and potentially the manufacturer and the local equivalent of the FAA!)

The pilot has to enter a 4-digit pin code in the plane.

Most of the associated wiring is only physically connected if there is weight on the front landing gear. You can't "hack" a plane in-flight and patch it with malware, the required cabling isn't connected.


That is to say, they used to. Whether they still do is rather entirely up in the air (wahey).


JSX operates based on a loophole in the part 135 rules, but that only allows 30 seats. A CRJ doesn't have the range for (nonstop) transatlantic, bigger planes would be impractical, and smaller ones with the range won't hold 30 people.


Oh, sure. But it's an indication that the market does exist.


But it works. That suggests a rule change is in order.


TLS did "exist" (well, as SSL), but this was a time when you'd maybe see it used on a few websites that had it on just the specific pages that took a credit card.

It was well before most other protocols were worrying about the security or privacy of being intercepted at all. Decades before TLS by-default-because-why-not started becoming a thing (largely because of LetsEncrypt). Especially for an app that was mostly for pirating stuff. Your email and it's login/passwords, IRC, instant messaging, regular browsing, etc all happened in plain text.

And despite the physical networks being super vulnerable back then. Ethernet was mostly connected by hubs/ring/shared coax, so every device received every other's packets. WiFi was just coming around and is a shared medium. Several rounds of inept security schemes failed to even keep people who don't know the network password from intercepting nearby traffic. Most networks didn't have security on yet anyway.

The Hotline protocol was/is mostly binary messages sent over TCP with a 4 character text message type followed by a corresponding packed data structure of the related data. (https://hotline.fandom.com/wiki/Protocol#Session_Initializat...)


> TLS did "exist" (well, as SSL), but this was a time when you'd maybe see it used on a few websites that had it on just the specific pages that took a credit card.

Indeed, I had forgotten about this. You'd go from the regular site on HTTP to the credit card page on HTTPS and back again. For a time, it was important to check that the page that you were actually entering the card details on was on HTTPS before you clicked the submit, and that the target was also HTTPS.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: