zlacker

>>make a youtube stunt that hurts nobody

Bullshirt.

The actual result was mere chance. He took zero precautions against hurting anyone beyond being over a remote area. Nothing to prevent wildfire (which would hurt a lot more than just people). The location of the crash was pure random chance.

Moreover, it is not ONLY for doing the stupid stunt, it is for deliberately obstructing, in multiple ways, the federal investigation. Plus, he hasn't been sentenced for 20 years, that is merely the maximum available sentence, highlighted for clickbait.

I'm only disappointed it took this long to get consequences for this outrageous BS stunt. And I'm all for risky things, just not being dishonest about it and endangering people who have no involvement or interest.

And yes, Boeing should ALSO be far more harshly punished for the deliberate 787MAX design flaws (but it looks like they didn't compound it by lying to investigators).

>>toss1+(OP)
737MAX,

one of the dumber things Boeing did was having two angle of attack sensors; who the hell thought it was possible to have a quorum of two

>>xxs+88
I’m not sure I understand the last statement. Are you saying they should have one sensor, or three? The problem wasn’t two sensors - that’s normal redundancy. The problem was that MCAS was only tied in with one of the AOA sensors, and wasn’t aware when there was a disagreement in readings from the two sensors.

>>shocke+5C
Three obviously - one would provide no redundancy, and having two with different readings would be bad as well since it would be unclear which provides a correct value