This is not even close to the worst ideas Apple ever had, even if you're only talking about mice.
The original USB mouse (for the first iMac) was round, so you couldn't orient it in your hand without looking at it constantly.
And it came with a very short cord (because there was a port on the right side of the keyboard to plug it into). But then the laptops got updated with USB ports and they were only on the LEFT side of the case.
For at least a year or two you could not buy an Apple mouse for your Apple PowerBook and use it in your right hand, because the cord was too short to go around the case.
Eventually they shipped a "Pro" mouse with revolutionary elongated shape and longer cord. (...and optical tracking, and what looked like zero buttons, which were pretty neat)
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?
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...
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.
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.
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 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"
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.
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.
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.
The original USB mouse (for the first iMac) was round, so you couldn't orient it in your hand without looking at it constantly.
And it came with a very short cord (because there was a port on the right side of the keyboard to plug it into). But then the laptops got updated with USB ports and they were only on the LEFT side of the case.
For at least a year or two you could not buy an Apple mouse for your Apple PowerBook and use it in your right hand, because the cord was too short to go around the case.
Eventually they shipped a "Pro" mouse with revolutionary elongated shape and longer cord. (...and optical tracking, and what looked like zero buttons, which were pretty neat)
reply