nauseus

7 minutes ago, gabruce said:

According to Wikipedia the current elevation of Bangkok is 8 metres. So my calculation is that it will take 800 years to sink below the current sea level. 

That's the BTS.

23 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

 

 

Especially for this old man here:

 

That's what I wrote. 

 

pilot/airline member/crew member

 

That's including even your pick.

 

In future you can scroll down instead to send silly replies.

Well covered there eh? Maybe it was a gold member.

1 minute ago, newbee2022 said:

That's what I said. Thanks for repeating 👍

It's not what you said. So no need to thank me.

Thank you.

57 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

You will be Surprised how many Pilots decided to take there life in a cockpit. The most famouse or infamouse being Andreas Lubitz killing 150 on board when he flew a German Wings Airbus A-320 directly into a Mountain in the French Alps in 2013. He did not just push the stick forcing the plane down he put it in a slow decent and calmly sat back waiting for impact while the captain can be heard trying to open the door into the cockpit. 

Yes, bloody horrible.

5 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

There was said actually a third pilot/airline member/crew member in the cockpit. Behind in the jump seat.

So at present it's unknown about this person and the voice recorder has to be checked who was speaking.

Again here a lot of assumptions. Same as directly after the crash.

 

There was no third pilot according to the manifest. If someone else as there it had to be a "guest". 

19 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

No you have not. You are breathing in oxygen, and exhaling carbon dioxide.

 

I was one of the first people in Australia to have solar panels on my roof, feeding back into the grid. That was 30 years ago.

 

The sea level rise is not uniform, it is governed by the topography of the coastline. Anyone who has lived in north-western Australia, with 10 metre tides, knows that.

Better to differentiate between tidal ranges and sea-level variations.

3 hours ago, edwinchester said:

The Dutch have managed that situation for hundreds of years. The Thais on the other hand seem unwilling or unable to take the necessary actions to either move the capital or lessen the impact of sealevel rise/land subsidence. 

They have but Bangkok and surrounds has a coast that was formerly mainly mangrove swamp - low elevation soft mud and sand - not a great foundation for dikes and with no existing high sand dunes to help, as the Dutch have. To protect Bangkok, it looks like that a huge area to the south would have to be contained in the northern part of the Bight of Bangkok.  

1 minute ago, KhaoHom said:

 

Thanks

 

I've known about the soapies up on Ratchada for many years as I live up there. They still exist and I heard nothing of them using city water although I guess that's possible.

 

Still, I do not think that even parts of Bangkok will be underwater in 4 years. I'm sure then what they will do is qualify it by saying...

 

Only monsoon season

 

During high tides

 

Depending on moon phase

 

When x, y, z ...

 

 

If it were going to be underwater in four years we would see some serious flooding now

Time to take a big breath, then.

Just now, Will B Good said:

 

I took it to be a very clever way of saying it was missing!!!!!

I doubt that but there are hundreds of similar (looking) switches for numerous applications so it could be possible to install a wrong switch type that does not have the locking feature. 

1 hour ago, deejai33 said:

Ask the FAA, their SAIB said the locking feature was disengaged on some planes.

 

I tried to look at switch specs and instructions too out of curiosity.  An indian newspaper said the switch was honeywell type 4TL837-3D.   

 

I googled that, but I didn't get very far except to see that many varieties of locking positions were sold as options. 

 

But you had to order just one option, rather then buy a multiple option one and configure it yourself.  

 

Maybe in 2018 it was possible to select the purchase of a disengaged option or one you could choose the locking position yourself.   But thats just  guessing on my part.   The SAIB needs to explain more details of what disengaged means.

 

It would be nice to see a video of a disengaged switch in operation and see how easy or not it would be to flip the switch down.    We've seen a lot of videos of non-disengaged switches and they seem suitably resilient to accidental movement.

 

 

Yes, the FAA SAIB NM-18-33 mentions 737 airplanes with fuel control switches being installed with the locking feature disengaged but does not explain the actual meaning of that. It later lists other Boeing models with different but similar toggle switches recommended for each.

These switches are advertised as military grade and probably last for decades but may break or get damaged like anything else. The final paragraph of the recommendations section eventually says: "we request that owners and operators report any failure of the locking feature of the fuel control switch to Boeing". This is the first use of the word "failure" in the report and implies that the switches should be initially installed as the specified, functional (lockable) units, which must be the case.

There is no definition of the "disengaged", what that means, or if it's even an option? 

11 hours ago, deejai33 said:

Lots of articles on web about how safe the locking mechanism is when installed correctly.  But :

 

The Air India Crash prelim report says on page 6:

 

"The FAA issued Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) No. NM-18-33 on 
December 17, 2018, regarding the potential disengagement of the fuel control switch locking 
feature. This SAIB was issued based on reports from operators of Model 737 airplanes that 
the fuel control switches were installed with the locking feature disengaged. "

 

The FAA think the switch can have the locking mechanism disabled.

 

Ethidad and other airlines are checking their switches.  They must also believe its possible to disable/disengage the locking mechanism.

 

 

I've  just looked over the specs again but no help. So, show me how the locking feature can be disengaged, please?

You've just heard? Great.

1 hour ago, deejai33 said:

I see your point, but its not very convincing when they could look at the switches and tell us for sure if the safety locking mechanism was enabled.  No guessing or implying.

 

We want to know was the locking mechanism disengaged or not.

 

We don't need to guess or imply such a key fact about the state of the switches.  The investigators must know by now surely.

 

3 hours ago, Old Croc said:

It is noticable that the noise, bluster and childish insults have slowed down considerably on this forum. Some have gone very quiet.

Maybe your ears work uni-directionally?

57 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

It makes perfect sense that Trump stays at the castle. I'm sure it will present an excellent opportunity for him and the pedo prince to catch up on things.

After all it's highly likely they have shared much more than a few laughs together.

Nasty,

3 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

???? Maybe a shrink can help you???

😳

At least he's not beyond it.

20 minutes ago, deejai33 said:

I agree with you that we need to know if the locking mechanism on the fuel switches was operational or faulty.

 

Its such an obvious fact that is key to the investigation.  If the locking mechanism was not engaged, then the switches could much more easily flip to down by accidentally knocking an object on them.

 

The accident report refers to an advisory notice about possible deactivation of locking mechanism.  So a very, very obvious question is was the locking mechanism deactivated ?

 

As you say, the investgators have the switches, and photos of them.  So surely they can tell if the locking mechanism is active.  

 

The report could have a simple statement such as 'the locking mechanism was engaged and working'.  

 

The report doesnt have that simple statement.  Why ?  Its such a key fact.

 

 

From the prelim report (page 10).

The thrust lever quadrant sustained significant thermal damage. Both thrust levers were found near the aft (idle) position. However, the EAFR data revealed that the thrust levers remained forward (takeoff thrust) until the impact. Both fuel control switch were found in the “RUN” position. (fig.13) The reverser levers were bent but were in the “stowed” position. The wiring from the TO/GA switches and autothrottle disconnect switches were visible, but heavily damaged.

So regardless of the locking feature, the switches were found set to RUN, despite the crash impact, heat and damage. This implies that they were locked in position.

3 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

A meeting of two kings. One is real, the other imagined. So sad for British people to host this brute. 

 

Someone asked "Why do some British people not like Donald Trump?" Nate White, an articulate and witty writer from England, wrote this magnificent response:

"A few things spring to mind. 

Trump lacks certain qualities which the British traditionally esteem. For instance, he has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no compassion, no wit, no warmth, no wisdom, no subtlety, no sensitivity, no self-awareness, no humility, no honour and no grace - all qualities, funnily enough, with which his predecessor Mr. Obama was generously blessed. So for us, the stark contrast does rather throw Trump’s limitations into embarrassingly sharp relief.

 

Plus, we like a laugh. And while Trump may be laughable, he has never once said anything wry, witty or even faintly amusing - not once, ever. I don’t say that rhetorically, I mean it quite literally: not once, not ever. And that fact is particularly disturbing to the British sensibility - for us, to lack humour is almost inhuman. But with Trump, it’s a fact. He doesn’t even seem to understand what a joke is - his idea of a joke is a crass comment, an illiterate insult, a casual act of cruelty.Trump is a troll. And like all trolls, he is never funny and he never laughs; he only crows or jeers. And scarily, he doesn’t just talk in crude, witless insults - he actually thinks in them. His mind is a simple bot-like algorithm of petty prejudices and knee-jerk nastiness. There is never any under-layer of irony, complexity, nuance or depth. It’s all surface. Some Americans might see this as refreshingly upfront. Well, we don’t. We see it as having no inner world, no soul.

 

And in Britain we traditionally side with David, not Goliath. All our heroes are plucky underdogs: Robin Hood, Dick Whittington, Oliver Twist. Trump is neither plucky, nor an underdog. He is the exact opposite of that. He’s not even a spoiled rich-boy, or a greedy fat-cat. He’s more a fat white slug. A Jabba the Hutt of privilege. And worse, he is that most unforgivable of all things to the British: a bully. 

That is, except when he is among bullies; then he suddenly transforms into a snivelling sidekick instead. 

 

There are unspoken rules to this stuff - the Queensberry rules of basic decency - and he breaks them all. He punches downwards - which a gentleman should, would, could never do - and every blow he aims is below the belt. He particularly likes to kick the vulnerable or voiceless - and he kicks them when they are down. So the fact that a significant minority - perhaps a third - of Americans look at what he does, listen to what he says, and then think 'Yeah, he seems like my kind of guy’ is a matter of some confusion and no little distress to British people, given that:* Americans are supposed to be nicer than us, and mostly are.* You don't need a particularly keen eye for detail to spot a few flaws in the man.

 

This last point is what especially confuses and dismays British people, and many other people too; his faults seem pretty bloody hard to miss. After all, it’s impossible to read a single tweet, or hear him speak a sentence or two, without staring deep into the abyss. He turns being artless into an art form; he is a Picasso of pettiness; a Shakespeare of bull<deleted>. His faults are fractal: even his flaws have flaws, and so on ad infinitum. God knows there have always been stupid people in the world, and plenty of nasty people too. But rarely has stupidity been so nasty, or nastiness so stupid.

 

in Britain we?

2 hours ago, RayC said:

 

What's your point?

I was just agreeing with you.

Just can't please some folk.

7 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

He's gone for a long holiday.

 

Wait till he learns it's very expensive to put children into school in Thailand. He claims he is going to home school them which is incredibly selfish in my opinion. Schooling is not just about education.

 

Wait till he learns his travel insurance will have to be replaced by health insurance in Thailand after a year out of living in the UK, most travel insurances become invalid.  

 

Wait till he learns rental is not that cheap. 

 

Wait till he navigates the visa process. 

 

Thailand is not as cheap as he thinks it is. 

 

He claims he is going to do social media and generate income. Him and the thousands of others. 

 

The UK Needs new laws in this generation that if you leave the country for a year you are no longer a citiizen. 

 

 

Another idiotic post.

2 hours ago, RayC said:

 

You're right, I wouldn't; who in their right mind would? But then not every immigrant - legal or illegal - is a sex offender.

Oh goody! That's OK then.

3 hours ago, Will B Good said:

Left six UK passports and about 2000 francs (obvs a longtime ago).....in a bag in the middle of a car park in Frejus or St Raphael, Southern France.

 

Didn't realise till the following day. Went to the Hotel de Ville......Belgium couple had handed it in...all intact.

 

 

Drop my wallet with military ID (big no no losing that) and about 1000 euros riding home from the mess in German. Police phoned me the next day all handed in.

 

I phoned the guy who found it and asked for his address......he refused and said he knew what I wanted to do and there was no need.

 

 

Nice story. They were often told but mostly years ago.

5 hours ago, Gandtee said:

My wife and I went to our local bank to renew our bank cards. We paid the renewal fee. Later, my wife received a call from the teller saying she had made a mistake and overcharged us for the transaction. She then asked what account we wanted it credited to. No, she didn't ask for account numbers. If she had I would have been on the alert. But how refreshing that someone admits to making a mistake. I've found that quite rare here. Renewed faith in human nature.

Maybe won the lottery and doubled down on the merit thingy.

Glad you found some honesty anyway.

1 hour ago, Hummin said:

He said Africans is the most diverse population, and as far I know Egyptians lives in Africa, with a mix from neighboring countries. 

 

He didnt mention one word about being black or not. 

 

What you going to say about Americans? They are Europeans with a mix of all continents? But they lives in America. Still Africa have more diversity for now

These days yes, Egyptians lives in Africa. But in ancient days some living there were a mix black people (significantly Nubian) and others from the Near East, the Levant. Through history, Egypt was invaded or conquered by different peoples as the Hyksos, Ku<deleted>es, Assyrians, Persians and later the Romans and Arabs. 

Along with his commentary the were accompanying pictures of black people for all the groups....except for Egypt...where we saw a pyramid.

The less said about the Americans, the better.