Comments by "Mikko Rantalainen" (@MikkoRantalainen) on "Mentour Now!" channel.

I think if they went the Tesla way and used the battery pack as part of the body, they could improve the battery capacity even today. Not sure if that's allowed by avitation regulations, though.
1
@wowpeter Great info! Maybe all you should have is a simple vibrator motor similar to one in PS4 game controller. That would allow making the stick shake a bit with a computer selectable vibration speed. That could be used to make different vibration patterns for stall, dual stick input and "lots of load on flight controls" feedback. And if that fails, you either lose the vibration or it vibrates in your hand all the time, neither of which should be much worse than modern Airbus design.
1
20:00 I think it would be good enough to have a automatic bonus for finding a security issue but one week cooldown period after a false report within which time the bonus might not be rewarded even if issue is real. That way, there would be incentive to think a bit before stopping the production because false finding might prevent earning the bonus for a week. However, I think the company should still pay the bonus if the reported issue was found within a week from false report in case the reported issue was serious enough. For minor issues, it's okay to no have extra bonus if you stopped the production within a week already. That is, at worst case you don't get extra bonus but you never have any personal penalty for stopping production for a security issue.
1
In addition to making hard to contain hydrogen in a tank because of low temperature and/or high pressure needed, it also makes metal brittle in long term exposure. And brittle metal is typically not something you want to have in an aircraft.
1
19:10 In software engineering, this is called "feature creep" where the requirements for the project will be extended on the fly. Without adequate risk evaluation, the risk for the project going bad increases very rapidly.
1
Great video. The only thing I would change for this kind of videos in the future is to use higher quality microphone setup. Something like Rode Wireless Go would be good enough.
1
I'd love to see a video about flight-by-wire implementation of Boeing vs Airbus. Especially the control method differences between normal mode and different fallback modes in case of system failures. For example, I take that AF477 crash was basically caused by pilots not understanding the fallback mode of their plane (combined with lack of situational awareness).
1
Great video! I think it's great to avoid speculating or guessing and only state the known facts. It was surprising to learn that this aircraft type doesn't have anti-ice system for the flight surfaces, only de-icing system which is obviously inferior solution.
1
It seems that the only politically acceptable way to fix the 1500 hour issue is to create alternative data driven certification method to get license to work as first officer on commerial flights. That way, politicians could say that new pilots have either minimum of 1500 hours OR better training than previous generation. In long run statistics could then be used to tear down the 1500 hour route when (not if) it will shown less safe.
1
One possible explanation is that ATC workload has been slowly increasing within the last decade but the minimum bar has not been raised accordingly. As a result, ATC cannot monitor and help the pilots as much as previously and an error made the pilot is no longer catched fast enough.
1
@purpleether5405 FAA is definitely an entity that also makes mistakes. However, that's the organisation that is trying to keep public airspace safe. Red Bull wanted to do this stunt in public airspace for some reason and for that, they need FAA permission.
1
I fully agree that a single pilot airpliners are not a realistic target until AGI (artificial general intelligence) has been invented. And when will AGI be invented? My guess is that it will happen as soon as near year 2030. Of course, predicting anything even that far into the future has high probability of turning out to be incorrect. And when (not if) we have human level or superhuman level AGI, there really isn't a point having any pilots in the cockpit. During the transition period it might make sense to have backup human pilot sitting alone in the cockpit but as you mentioned in the end, that job would be far from great. And even with human pilot sitting in the cockpit, the best action would be close to old joke about landing a space shuttle: in space shuttle there's computer controlling the shuttle, human monitoring the computer ready to take control in case of something going wrong and a german shepherd ready to bite the human if he or she tries to intervene with the computer system. Whenever a human pilot thinks that AGI has made an error and human pilot should override the computer system, the changes are high that the only mistake in this situation is the human pilot incorrectly thinking that AGI has made an error.
1
@wickedcabinboy Red Bull or the pilots didn't want to mitigate the risk or they would have just used safety pilot in both planes, like they did during the practice. The fact that FAA explicitly said no for removing the safety pilot should have been pretty clear clue that they are taking non-acceptable risks with the stunt design.
1
@AndrewBrowner Law usually works by having everything allowed except explicitly mentioned special cases. Do you think that FAA works different way and only specifically allows some things but all undefined cases are considered disallowed?
1
Great video as usual. Though, I would recommend not using the music in the background while you're speaking – it makes listening your speech harder.
1
I actually find many Red Bull marketing stunts pretty good. However, when marketing department wants something and official regulator (FAA) doesn't give the required permission, the marketing department MUST switch to another plan.
1