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

Delta flight lands in Charlotte without front landing gear

wbtv.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 302 posts

Re: Delta flight lands in Charlotte without front landing gear

#241

Post by phpisthebest »

vanattab wrote: post #211
joshstrange wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you imagine leaving your laptop on a plane? In a situation like this I'd almost certainly grab that and try to take it with me. Airlines are already woefully incompetent in the best of times with your luggage, what's even the timeline for getting this stuff back? I don't buy the whole "we need it for the investigation", buddy if something in my carry-on stopped the front landing gear from opening you've got bigge…

The investigation is not the primary reason your told the leave your stuff its to avoid delays in an evacuation. Imagine that the plane was less lucky I fire had started in the front nose cone section. Then people trying to get there bags could jeopardize the safety of the passengers in the front of the plane.

You have completely miss understood the complaint.

The complaint is about the FAA hold passenger items after the emergnecy is over while they "investigate"

The process should be

Evac -> Fire Dept clears the plane > Airline gets passengers there stuff

it should not be

Evac > Fire Dept > NTSB Looks at things > FAA Looks at things > Someone 3 years later Passengers get their things

because the FAA as the latter policy, people will be more prone to try to take their stuff, then if they knew once evacuated they would get their belongings before leaving the airport, not at some undetermined time later

FAA Policy increases the danger for everyone.

Re: Delta flight lands in Charlotte without front landing gear

#242

Post by Sophira »

getoj wrote: post #218
ethanbond wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a general heuristic, I’ve found that people who create policies in a specialized field of expertise tend to think through those policies a whole lot more than internet commentators like myself do. Especially when those policies will obviously piss off a bunch of people, I can either assume those people who spend decades thinking about X don’t know what they’re doing, or I can say “hey, I probably know way less tha…

It’s worth remembering that there is often a conflict of interest between the system and the individual. An example where I’m from is train station escalators. There is an unwritten social rule that you stand on the left, and let anyone who is in a hurry walk down on the right. This benefits the individuals because if you’re in a hurry you can get through faster, and if you’re not you don’t care. But the rail company…

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

I... kind of hate this. I can understand it, but I hate it nonetheless. I don't think it can ever be a universal truth, though.

Of course, it does require discipline to know the difference between "the needs of the many" and "the needs of the corporate entity you're working for".

Re: Delta flight lands in Charlotte without front landing gear

#243

Post by phpisthebest »

Symbiote wrote: post #230
joshstrange wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you imagine leaving your laptop on a plane? In a situation like this I'd almost certainly grab that and try to take it with me. Airlines are already woefully incompetent in the best of times with your luggage, what's even the timeline for getting this stuff back? I don't buy the whole "we need it for the investigation", buddy if something in my carry-on stopped the front landing gear from opening you've got bigge…

I've been through a rough emergency landing where there was a serious concern for potential fire, and I wasn't even thinking of my government-issued laptop and phone (to use the phrasing in another comment).

>>government-issued laptop and phone (to use the phrasing in another comment).

yes if you did not pay for the items, it will not cost you anything to replace the items then doubt you would think about them...

it will be shocking for you to learn that some times people travel with possessions that are not paid for by other people.

Re: Delta flight lands in Charlotte without front landing gear

#244

Post by eschneider »

tialaramex wrote: post #204
kube-system wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aviation is not safe because of luck or because aerospace engineers build infallible machines. Aviation is safe because of a culture of safety that puts the right procedures in place to mitigate problems that will eventually happen.

And when you say "Aviation is safe" you mean specifically Scheduled Aviation ie people buy tickets and go on a plane with some guys they've never met flying it. Scheduled Aviation is remarkably safe. GA (General aviation, people who own a little plane and maybe just fly it for fun, or it's a professional expense for say a plastic surgeon and allows them to fly 300 miles home on Thursday evening after working four day…

GA is as safe as you want to make it for yourself. Most accidents happen because people are in a hurry to get where they're going, so they force an uncertain situation into a bad one. Police heli and medivac are motivated to fly where that would be 'unwise' because people might get hurt otherwise. It runs up the numbers. :/

Re: Delta flight lands in Charlotte without front landing gear

#245

Post by devoutsalsa »

tialaramex wrote: post #204
kube-system wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aviation is not safe because of luck or because aerospace engineers build infallible machines. Aviation is safe because of a culture of safety that puts the right procedures in place to mitigate problems that will eventually happen.

And when you say "Aviation is safe" you mean specifically Scheduled Aviation ie people buy tickets and go on a plane with some guys they've never met flying it. Scheduled Aviation is remarkably safe. GA (General aviation, people who own a little plane and maybe just fly it for fun, or it's a professional expense for say a plastic surgeon and allows them to fly 300 miles home on Thursday evening after working four day…

I used to sell life insurance. "Minor" health problems would result in a slightly higher rate: higher than average blood pressure, asthma, thyroid issues, etc. Serious health problems like diabetes, cancer, smoking, and so on meant much higher premiums, especially when combined. If you were a private pilot, they wouldn't even give you insurance (most of the time) unless you agreed to be covered in all cases except flying. It's called an aviation exclusion rider.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/791683/0000791683030...

Re: Delta flight lands in Charlotte without front landing gear

#246

Post by sandworm101 »

phpisthebest wrote: post #186

>>He said they were told the Federal Aviation Administration has a hold on the plane so nothing can move on it or from it. And then they wonder why people try to take their bags during an emergency off boarding.... Because they know they will not see it for a long time if ever again. Stupid policy

Zero sympathy. Any passenger who survived such an incident should render the investigation any help they ask for. An airliner suffered a major fault ... and everyone walked away. That only happened because of decades of safety culture.

Reasons they may need the bags: Possible interference (bombs, sabotage and such). Weight and balance of the aircraft. Possible fires. Possible crash-related evidence in those bags (ie bags exposed to G/chemicals/fires etc). There are any number of scenarios where the bags might be useful to the investigation. Until those are ruled out, and ruled out properly though the process, the survivors can wait.

Just be glad the FAA isn't confiscating clothing. They can do that. In cases of fire or chemical exposure they very well can confiscate clothing that might contain useful evidence. In some circumstances even blood samples could be taken (chemical exposure etc). Got a cellphone video of the landing? It is in their power to take that too. Planes are as safe as they are because crash investigators have carte blanche. Passenger inconvenience should never trump that proven process.

Re: Delta flight lands in Charlotte without front landing gear

#247

Post by failbuffer »

duxup wrote: post #150
ryandrake wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And when there is not a tower nearby, you, uhh... find a way. My buddy was flying into one of the many uncontrolled airports in NorCal, and there was a guy in a single-engine retractable gear circling the airport. When Buddy made his downwind call, the Guy radioed "Hey I'm not getting any indication whether my gear is down or not, can you fly by me and tell me if it's down?" It was down, so Guy ended up attempting th…

I recall a mid air collision that occurred that way once. I forget the exact crash name, but IIRC a civilian aircraft was trying to spot for damage on another aircraft and they got too close. Not that people shouldn’t help but you gotta be careful with maneuvers you don’t typically make, even if trying to be helpful / are a pilot.

That rings a bell... I think the civilian craft was a helicopter, but my google-fu ain't finding the incident.

Re: Delta flight lands in Charlotte without front landing gear

#248

Post by nunuvit »

nkozyra wrote: post #238
brianpan wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More time to respond is a plus. Adding hardware is a minus. Good enough is good enough.

> Adding hardware is a minus. It's a cost, which is why I'm trying to understand what the ROI would be. > Good enough is good enough. In cases like this, yes, but ... planes do crash due to mechanical failure and it's not unusual for there to be confusion from instrumentation where visual confirmation could help.

I'm sure there are at least a few camera placements that would be worthwhile.

To answer your earlier question, not to split hairs, but I disagree with "always". You can inadvertently increase risk when trying to reduce it, or unwittingly prioritize things that offer less bang for your buck. That's why risk analysis is important.

Re: Delta flight lands in Charlotte without front landing gear

#249

Post by systemvoltage »

ethanbond wrote: post #196
wkat4242 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it doesn't really. The bags are nowhere near the gear

In this instance yes, but presumably the policy is a general one for all sorts of aviation incidents. You could argue “well they should rapidly diagnose and make a decision” and, sure, but that diagnosis is exactly the question isn’t it?

Than should be at the discretion of the investigators. Why have a blanket policy?

Re: Delta flight lands in Charlotte without front landing gear

#250

Post by ithkuil »

phpisthebest wrote: post #241
vanattab wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The investigation is not the primary reason your told the leave your stuff its to avoid delays in an evacuation. Imagine that the plane was less lucky I fire had started in the front nose cone section. Then people trying to get there bags could jeopardize the safety of the passengers in the front of the plane.

You have completely miss understood the complaint. The complaint is about the FAA hold passenger items after the emergnecy is over while they "investigate" The process should be Evac -> Fire Dept clears the plane > Airline gets passengers there stuff it should not be Evac > Fire Dept > NTSB Looks at things > FAA Looks at things > Someone 3 years later Passengers get their things because the FAA as the latter policy,…

In other words:

It's understandable that when confronted with an irresponsible behaviour of one particular person we tend to blame that person for being irresponsible.

But the fact is that there will be a given number of irresponsible people around.

It's also irresponsible to set up rules in such a way to make it more likely that some irresponsible people will do irresponsible things. Especially when there may be other rules that could reduce the chances.

Post reply on HN