Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Fell 15,000 Feet and Lived (2009)

uss-la-ca135.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 274 posts

Re: I Fell 15,000 Feet and Lived (2009)

#151

Post by lefstathiou »

merely-unlikely wrote: post #136

It amazes the quantity of resources that will sometimes be deployed to rescue a sole man (or a handful) lost at sea. Not to say this is a bad thing; I would certainly appreciate it if I were lost at sea. But it might be questionable to a pure utilitarian. I counted at least one plane, two ships, and a helicopter all being diverted for the rescue. That's a great deal of expense in terms of fuel, I assume hundreds of c…

My childhood best friend went into the Army to be a Ranger. He once told me that there is basically no higher priority event than a search and rescue mission. Down to a man, if you are captured, or at risk of capture, special forces and black hawks get called in with the ability to use any means necessary to get you out of there alive. He said it was an extreme source of pride for him personally to see how far they went to save their men on the ground and that this policy empowered you to fight harder and more confidently knowing that the full force of the US military was behind you (ie "no soldier left behind")

While I am no expert on these things, a few of the videos / articles / images I've seen of Russians fighters in Ukraine lead me to believe they don't feel this similar level of support from their armed forces, which could be contributing adversely to the outcome (from their perspective).

Re: I Fell 15,000 Feet and Lived (2009)

#152

Post by madrox »

merely-unlikely wrote: post #136

It amazes the quantity of resources that will sometimes be deployed to rescue a sole man (or a handful) lost at sea. Not to say this is a bad thing; I would certainly appreciate it if I were lost at sea. But it might be questionable to a pure utilitarian. I counted at least one plane, two ships, and a helicopter all being diverted for the rescue. That's a great deal of expense in terms of fuel, I assume hundreds of c…

This reminds me of the articles attempting to calculate how much we've spent fictionally bringing Matt Damon back from places [1] and a line from the end of The Martian: "But really, they did it because every human being has a basic instinct to help each other out. It might not seem that way sometimes, but it’s true."

1: https://time.com/4162254/cost-of-rescuing-matt-damon/

Re: I Fell 15,000 Feet and Lived (2009)

#153

Post by dctoedt »

yamtaddle wrote: post #142
merely-unlikely wrote: post #136

It amazes the quantity of resources that will sometimes be deployed to rescue a sole man (or a handful) lost at sea. Not to say this is a bad thing; I would certainly appreciate it if I were lost at sea. But it might be questionable to a pure utilitarian. I counted at least one plane, two ships, and a helicopter all being diverted for the rescue. That's a great deal of expense in terms of fuel, I assume hundreds of c…

In the civilian cases, there may be large economic benefits to the way people behave when they expect rescue if something goes wrong, even if very few particular rescues make economic sense per se . There's likely a similar argument to made for the military, but involving morale and willingness to take personal risks in emergencies or times of war. Esprit de Corps and all that. These both in addition to all other arg…

> There's likely a similar argument to made for the military, but involving morale and willingness to take personal risks in emergencies or times of war. Esprit de Corps and all that.

Yup. But it's not a conscious calculation; more like a primal urge (or so I'm told, by people like my dad, who had first-hand experience fighting in the Korean War).

Re: I Fell 15,000 Feet and Lived (2009)

#154

Post by ars »

merely-unlikely wrote: post #123
spbaar wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't it also mention that a lot of survivors hit some type of slope?

Not sure if it was the same one but I've read you also want to avoid water (since it doesn't compress). Go for dirt/grass if possible.

That doesn't make sense: dirt/grass also don't compress. Small branches might be good, but water is certainly more compresible than dirt.

Re: I Fell 15,000 Feet and Lived (2009)

#155

Post by LorenPechtel »

crdrost wrote: post #28
Test0129 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was under the impression that for non-surfaced subs the only way to communicate them was to fly close to the surface and lower a boom into the water. Is that not the case?

These aren't subs, they are ships. I would imagine the plane circled overhead at a low altitude several times, tried to get their attention, kept going away and seeing if they would follow, kept going back when they didn't. And people on the ship were probably looking up being like, “what's his deal?” A “shot across the bows” is a colloquial expression for a warning demanding imminent action. The idea was that long a…

Even without that--if an aircraft that I have identified as an emergency services craft indicates a direction to me I'm going to figure there's some reason I should be heading in that direction. They clearly know something I don't.

Re: I Fell 15,000 Feet and Lived (2009)

#156

Post by otikik »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #148
dctoedt wrote: post #146

Something similar happened to my dad (USAF fighter pilot) in around 1961 or 62: He was test-flying a T-33 single-engine jet trainer assigned to his unit after it'd had repair work. The engine quit and wouldn't restart. He ejected, but his parachute didn't deploy fully (much the same as in the article) and he got tangled in the shrouds. He said a quick Hail Mary just before crashing head-first in a muddy, fresh-plowed…

>and soon afterwards got medically grounded — which meant he lost flight pay, with four school-aged kids while stationed in the Washington DC area; my mother had to go back to work as an RN (registered nurse) to make ends meet. That’s so, so wrong.

Not only it’s inhumane, it’s also stupid: it incentivizes pilots who have problems like that to hide them, instead of coming forward.

Re: I Fell 15,000 Feet and Lived (2009)

#157

Post by dctoedt »

lefstathiou wrote: post #151
merely-unlikely wrote: post #136

It amazes the quantity of resources that will sometimes be deployed to rescue a sole man (or a handful) lost at sea. Not to say this is a bad thing; I would certainly appreciate it if I were lost at sea. But it might be questionable to a pure utilitarian. I counted at least one plane, two ships, and a helicopter all being diverted for the rescue. That's a great deal of expense in terms of fuel, I assume hundreds of c…

My childhood best friend went into the Army to be a Ranger. He once told me that there is basically no higher priority event than a search and rescue mission. Down to a man, if you are captured, or at risk of capture, special forces and black hawks get called in with the ability to use any means necessary to get you out of there alive. He said it was an extreme source of pride for him personally to see how far they w…

See, e.g., the unbelievable heroics — and losses — in rescuing a shot-down American flier during (what we call) the Vietnam war, including a Navy SEAL who was awarded* the Medal of Honor for his astonishing feats in finally getting the guy out more than ten days after he was downed.

* For those who don't know: Recipients of medals for valor in combat (I'm not a member of that august group) don't like it when people say they "won" the medals, because all too often some of their friends died in the engagement; the preferred usage is that someone "received" or "was awarded" the medal in question.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_of_Bat_21_Bravo

Re: I Fell 15,000 Feet and Lived (2009)

#158

Post by ars »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #94
whoisjuan wrote: post #5

Still not as impressive as Vesna Vulovic, a flight attendant who holds the Guinness world record for surviving the highest fall without a parachute: 10,160 m (33,330 ft; 6.31 mi) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesna_Vulovi%C4%87

Terminal velocity is terminal velocity, so the speed at which you fall tops out relative to altitude pretty quickly Water is basically concrete at terminal velocity. I'm not an expert, but I wouldn't be surprised if he survived because he fell into the water at the location of his plane, which was emitting bubbles that break the surface tension and make water safer to fall into

There's nothing whatsoever to do with surface tension, which is utterly minimal.

The actual reason water is so hard is simply that the water need to move out of your way when you fall into it, and if you are moving faster than it can do that then you simply hit the water as if it were a solid.

Both bubbles and waves make it easier for the water to move out of your way.

Re: I Fell 15,000 Feet and Lived (2009)

#159

Post by ars »

bmitc wrote: post #58

"Jesus Christ!" is my only reaction. This guy survived a sequence of catastrophes, any one of which could have killed him: fire in a plane, failed ejection and being ripped out of the plane, parachute not deploying and hitting water, and being in open ocean for a few hours. I do wonder how in the world he survived hitting the water. Is it just that he hit the jackpot in terms of his entry angle, body position, clothi…

Re: surface tension, see my reply here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33348619

Re: I Fell 15,000 Feet and Lived (2009)

#160

Post by yamtaddle »

dctoedt wrote: post #153
yamtaddle wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the civilian cases, there may be large economic benefits to the way people behave when they expect rescue if something goes wrong, even if very few particular rescues make economic sense per se . There's likely a similar argument to made for the military, but involving morale and willingness to take personal risks in emergencies or times of war. Esprit de Corps and all that. These both in addition to all other arg…

> There's likely a similar argument to made for the military, but involving morale and willingness to take personal risks in emergencies or times of war. Esprit de Corps and all that. Yup. But it's not a conscious calculation; more like a primal urge (or so I'm told, by people like my dad, who had first-hand experience fighting in the Korean War).

Oh, I'm sure it is, probably pretty far up the command structure, and even all the way to the top, depending on the people involved, let alone for those close to the action. But even the bean-counters may not question it or try to curb the practice, no matter how cold-hearted they may be, because it may in fact be a good use of money.
Post reply on HN