381–390 of 483 posts
Lucky it didn’t happen half way. Could have been several hours on one engine and the other one shaking and on fire.
Luckily flight plans are always required to be within a certain number of minutes of a place to land, and are certified to operate on one engine for that period. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS
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…
How is that safe unless you've got a production line doing it? Seems impossible to re-assemble it in the same way as it was done in factory...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i think in part by having more than 2 engines on those flights
Very few in service aircraft in commercial passenger fleets have more than two engines, and even the ones with more than two engines have modified ETOPS rules to comply with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One thing that sets software apart from other engineering disciplines is that they are grounded in physics (bits running on a semiconductor doesn't matter for this discussion) and have been around (in some form) for thousands of years. How do we know if a design is sound? We can check it by doing the math. How do we know if a program is sound (what does that even mean? There's our first problem)? Well, we rely on a l…
I'm wading into waters that are way over my head here, but my understanding is that it is possible for software to be provably correct, in the mathematical sense of "proof." I'm well aware of the admixture of folklore, experience, and caffeine-fueled inspiration that constitutes much of the software that runs our world.
The big issue is that writing a useful specification can be hard. Especially if you want to also make the specification easy to check.
A side issue is that your proof will make assumptions about how a computer works that are simplified.
This is quite timely, I was just looking at similar incidents yesterday. It is somewhat similar to a BA A319 flight where the engine covers weren't latched. They immediately ripped off, taking out one of the engines. Similar footage of exposed engine internals. Safely landed after dumping fuel. That one led to a redesign of the latches. Another very interesting one I found was a prop going through the fuselage of a D…
...aaaaaaand that's why i refuse to fly.
Irony means you’d personally stay at home, but then have an engine cowling land on you in your garden.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What, you don’t like the anchor people on TV asking each other how they feel about every piece of news and making horrible puns at every opportunity? Or having expected announcements be reported as BREAKING NEWS?
I distinctly recall signing up for "breaking news alerts" a few days after 9/11. I figured if something major happened, it would be nice to receive a notification about it. I quickly learned that my definition of breaking news was dramatically different from that of the news..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's very likely that they're an AvHerald reader. It's the absolute de facto gold standard website in its field, and sensationalism and drama is not appreciated -- a large chunk of the usual audience are aviation professionals. My dad was a pilot, and I've got some few hours myself. You can bet that if either of us watched this event happen, we'd mentally be documenting it as best as we possibly can, both to try to p…
I can draw some parallels between that and a healthy SRE culture. Except for the casualties, of course. Wondering if the first SREs who created the guidelines had aviation industry experience.
it's like that old experiment that i cant find source for - wall st traders switched with military guys and wall st outperformed mils because they are used to dealing with uncertain information...
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.
2018: United 777 same PW engine (seems very similar but without fire) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-_IAKCBTxc&t=10s
2016: KAL 777 same PW engines (aborted takeoff after engine failure) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bHrW_34kAk
All planes had zero casualties.