301–310 of 483 posts
Maybe a system for emergency detaching of the failed engine with a parachute would help aleviate the consequences of flying with a uncontrollably vibrating fireball?
Some honest questions here for experts: 0. Why was the engine flaming in the first video? Why didn't the pilots cut fuel to that engine immediately and use the other engine to land? 1. What is the best way to communicate issues to the pilot if you're a passenger and see something the pilot can't see? For example once I was sitting in the back of the aircraft on Airtran and I saw a screw on the jet loosening and almos…
> 1. What is the best way to communicate issues to the pilot if you're a passenger and see something the pilot can't see? Flight attendants is the passengers' interface to the whole flight environment. BTW there's seniority rank among the attendants too, chain of command, so to speak. I would think that your observation was likely being noted, not sure if relayed to the pilots. Juice is the best option, noone needs t…
I worked at a Large Internet Infrastructure Company for a long time, and saw software development practices that made my hair curl. All I could think was, "Gee, I'm glad we're not working on aviation software!" Seriously, though: software "engineering" could actually earn the name, if we had rigorous professional standards, regulatory oversight, and product liability.
You just don't need that in software when most of the industry is low consequence. It's only losing money at most tech companies, not killing your coworkers. This hasn't happened to me personally, but it's not cool when Rob the test pilot, whose family you've hung out with and that you've gone on hikes with, literally dies next day in a fiery crash. But that's the risk any test pilot accepts.
Can I tell your customers that the software you're selling them is only built for "low consequence" applications?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another way of looking at it is that after flying and accumulating 25 years of wear and tear without major incident, we now have seen a repeatable flaw that these aircraft may encounter due to their age.
As well as two demonstrations that the aircraft meets the design specification that even a catastrophic failure in the worst stage of flight is easily recoverable. I'd expect an increased inspection rate, possibly some new mandated ND testing for fractures and discontinuities (the last one was an LP shaft failure, IIRC). One thing that does bug me, though is that we now have two events where the shroud was lost. Were…
Almost identical incident happened 3 years ago - the same type (B777-200), the same engine (PW4077), the same operator (United Airlines), the same side (right engine), the same failure (unconfined engine failure). https://avherald.com/h?article=4b4e8ca7&opt=0 I would not be surprised if the whole fleet of this type/engine gets grounded for some time.
And I’m supposed to fly on a 777-200 to Denver operated by United in just a few days. Yay!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 777 has been flying for 25 years with almost no fatal accidents. Unless your flight will be flying over Russian anti-aircraft missile batteries or through a wormhole above Malaysia, you should be perfectly safe.
Another way of looking at it is that after flying and accumulating 25 years of wear and tear without major incident, we now have seen a repeatable flaw that these aircraft may encounter due to their age.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_maintenance_checks#D_...
A commercial aircraft does not just accumulate wear and tear for 25 years until something breaks. They can basically fly indefinitely, but in reality after two or three D checks they are usually retired because the cost of the D check is more than the value of the aircraft.
You can hear the air/ground communications for this flight here via LiveATC.net. The pilots declare an emergency and then a mayday call beginning at 1:15 of the audio. https://forums.liveatc.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1...
"Mayday" is the internationally agreed code, so that's one reason to use that - but US accident investigators also noticed a pattern that American pilots are often too reluctant to declare emergency status when it's appropriate as it is here, because they feel it's "not that bad" yet. Having them say it's an emergency without saying "Mayday" is good enough and might mean a few more cases that should have been emergen…
1) Often ATC will ask you a lot of distracting questions. It starts with what the problem is and how many souls are on board, but can be lengthy and doesn't solve your problem.
If you listen to the Sully Hudson flight, you can hear how terse Sully is to avoid a conversation with ATC while he's busy flying.
2) You may be asked for a written letter afterwards, or an investigation may start. Your airline would be interested.
3) ATC is not responsible for your plane, and cannot fly it for you. Most ATC don't even have an airplane rating.
Pilots have a "get out of jail free card" by filing a NASA report for non-intentional violations. You can search that database.
I filed one once when I was flying an old rental with sketchy navigation equipment into Class B just in case the gauges were out of tolerance.
Source: commerically-rated pilot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As well as two demonstrations that the aircraft meets the design specification that even a catastrophic failure in the worst stage of flight is easily recoverable. I'd expect an increased inspection rate, possibly some new mandated ND testing for fractures and discontinuities (the last one was an LP shaft failure, IIRC). One thing that does bug me, though is that we now have two events where the shroud was lost. Were…
> As well as two demonstrations that the aircraft meets the design specification that even a catastrophic failure in the worst stage of flight is easily recoverable. But in that type of failure, you can't control where the pieces go. https://abc7ny.com/philadelphia-emergency-landing-southwest-... It resulted in depressurization and partial ejection/death.
That's crazy, in the Netherlands today there was another flight that dropped engine parts (much smaller though, they're said to have been turbine blades) that hit cars and people. It was also an airliner (747-400). Considering how rare an occurrence is, it's really weird to have both happen on the exact same day. https://www.airlive.net/breaking-turbine-blades-of-a-boeing-... By the way I'm surprised that fire keeps…
Random = clusters happen. In fact, mathematicians were hired during the Battle of England to estimate whether the Germans were aiming for specific buildings (“why is there a cluster of bombs around this church???” or around some secret offices) or just spreading randomly. Verdict: They weren’t aiming, it was random chance that bombs made some clusters onto some buildings. This is what random looks like: No even distr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another way of looking at it is that after flying and accumulating 25 years of wear and tear without major incident, we now have seen a repeatable flaw that these aircraft may encounter due to their age.
Aircraft undergo regular preventative maintenance checks, with letter codes A - D. The D check being the most comprehensive, it occurs every 6-10 years and basically the entire aircraft is taken apart and inspected, looking for among other things anything like stress fractures, corrosion, unusual wear, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_maintenance_checks#D_... A commercial aircraft does not just accumulate…
In this case, something obviously went awry and it's both engineering, planning, and a miracle no one died or was crushed from debris from above. Regardless, comments like yours leave me feeling far more confident in this sort of thing.