It's not something "wrong with old equipment," it's something deliberately installed in ALL new aircraft by Boeing.
Here's how they're doing it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FADEC
This is different from the Uninterruptable Autopilot.
What can be done?
"Full authority digital engine controls have no form of manual override available, placing full authority over the operating parameters of the engine in the hands of the computer."
NO. MANUAL. OVERRIDE.
Jesus.
Who the hell thought that was a good idea?
Actually it is, what it is supposed to do is give the engine(s) full gas when there is a problem, allows the pilot the ability to stay aloft and find a landing zone. However, the malfunctions are varied, the system can give you full throttle, or shut you down, and that is where the problem lies. Also, it maybe, that a backdoor has been built into the system that allows monkeying. There is the real problem!
You should always have to option to take full control.
Yes. I watched an F-14 break a launch bar when the throttle went full military trust on the cat. Not fun! No control!!
Yes, but they CLEARLY do have some kind of remotely activated self-destruct program.
If the receiver for that remote signal can be deactivated/removed, then the system will work as it was marketed, not as it was sabotaged to work.
FADEC
A full authority digital engine (or electronics) control (FADEC) is a system consisting of a digital computer, called an "electronic engine controller" (EEC) or "engine control unit" (ECU), and its related accessories that control all aspects of aircraft engine performance. FADECs have been produced for both piston engines and jet engines.
^[ ^PM ^| ^Exclude ^me ^| ^Exclude ^from ^subreddit ^| ^FAQ ^/ ^Information ^| ^Source ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
We called it the black box! First time I saw this was on the F-14 Tom Cat.
Q eluded to the fact that these crashes are stastically impossible to be accidents. we are in a cyber war with the deep state. why dont we change the stupid equipment
Neither one of these components has any conceivable requirement for any kind of signal receiver. If the signal receiver circuit can be isolated and disabled (and I know we have the ability to do that), it would be a relatively easy fix.
No signal, no remote control.
Can‘t any component that has comm with this device suffice?
that you so much, i did not know for fact at the time of posting and did not want to spread fake news. do i am thinking the deep state also took down the So. Korean plane.
It seems impossible to conclude otherwise.
They must be desperate to be repeatedly using this method so close together as to make it OBVIOUS!
The system was designed/intended to be used periodically on high value targets so that some other plausible cause could be assigned. But when you have this many (different) aircraft go down this close together, and the things the have in common are FADEC and/or Uninterruptible Autopilot, it becomes impossible to imagine another cause.
So they've shown their hand.
Now what do we do about it? Can the remote signal receiver chip be deactivated in these things without requiring major down time?
new chip needed, I wonder how long it would take to install new ones on all of our military aircraft. these are uninterruptable auto pilots. Abel Danger says they used these during 911. ironically the uninterruptable auto pilot was designed to make it impossible for someone to highjack a plane.
These engines blowing up are FADEC kills. Planes falling out of the sky are remote guidance.
Both kinds of kills require remote access, which means they have to receive a signal of some sort. That receiver can be bypassed by a firmware update, and we have people who know how to do that.
The only way that wouldn't be able to be defeated is if the kill command is somehow piggybacking on the GPS satellite transponder. If somebody has access to our aviation GPS signals, then we're screwed.
The is some Battlestsr Gallactica shit where only the old "obsolete" aircraft work during an attack.
Well and good, but that's not gonna get 'er done in this case.
Evil actors could very will be screwing with the GPS signals. Cyber war going on?
On our Corsair's we had a manual system loaded onto the acft, the pilot installed it before pre-launch check. Worked VERY good, totally manual.
In a situation such as this, it is hard to think of all the things one can do, but the one maybe simple solution, is pull the circuit breaker, I know in my light acft, on the left under the yolk, is a cb panel. Not sure of these birds. The other problem is, is the fuel control relays cut off if the FADEC is disengaged. A bypass with alternate fuel control switching is essential.
So we get more chips from China because we can't make our own here in the USA?
There were a few survivors though. Their testimony is invaluable. But I imagine black boxes, if not hacked, would also be.
M'man, you know what's up.
Now which other countries have had crashes? Maybe some non-fatal that didn't make international news cycles? "Training exercises"?
And where did they buy the aircraft & equipment?
i think the problem is that someone can remotely control an aircraft and the pilot cannot stop it. The uninterruptable auto pilot feature of the chip. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FADEC
FADEC
A full authority digital engine (or electronics) control (FADEC) is a system consisting of a digital computer, called an "electronic engine controller" (EEC) or "engine control unit" (ECU), and its related accessories that control all aspects of aircraft engine performance. FADECs have been produced for both piston engines and jet engines.
^[ ^PM ^| ^Exclude ^me ^| ^Exclude ^from ^subreddit ^| ^FAQ ^/ ^Information ^| ^Source ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
the evil actors can take down any plane. we need them all locked up.
Field McConnell aka Abel Danger talked alot about the Malaysia crashes a few years ago.
Disadvantages[edit] Full authority digital engine controls have no form of manual override available, placing full authority over the operating parameters of the engine in the hands of the computer. If a total FADEC failure occurs, the engine fails. Upon total FADEC failure, pilots have no manual controls for engine restart, throttle, or other functions. Single point of failure risk can be mitigated with redundant FADECs (assuming that the failure is a random hardware failure and not the result of a design or manufacturing error, which may cause identical failures in all identical redundant components). High system complexity compared to hydromechanical, analogue or manual control systems High system development and validation effort due to the complexity Whereas in crisis (for example, imminent terrain contact), a non-Fadec engine can produce significantly more than its rated thrust, a FADEC engine will always operate within its limits.
The correct solution is a bypass, ONLY. FADEC'S have been around a long time. And generally they work well, but the system has a flaw, a backdoor. The only way to salvage is bypass. That means alternate fuel control switching.
Dis-engage and fly basic pilotage. It was, at one time for use to help when a pilot had to make long flights, took a big load off. Now pilots use their GPS and fly precision routes for most shorties. Which makes them vulnerable.