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

Air traffic controllers pushed to the brink

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 362 posts

Re: Air traffic controllers pushed to the brink

#231

Post by MaxBarraclough »

thanatosmin wrote: post #100
HPsquared wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the safest per mile, but not per journey. A nice comparison to other transport methods, including taking the bus, and the Space Shuttle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_safety#Transport_comp...

These numbers are from 1990-2000. Airlines have gotten much safer since then, so I believe they would now be much safer per-journey, too. https://www.airlines.org/dataset/safety-record-of-u-s-air-ca... (The difference between per-mile and per-journey is still interesting!)

As well as using extremely stale sources, the Wikipedia article fails to separate airlines from other forms of civil aviation.

US airlines have a fatal crash rate very close to zero. 'General aviation', which roughly means private light aircraft, is a very different world and has roughly 1 fatal crash per 100,000 hours flown, making it less safe than driving. Chartered flights are somewhere in the middle.

There's not much sense looking at the overall figure for aviation; the different categories really are very different.

Re: Air traffic controllers pushed to the brink

#232

Post by MaxBarraclough »

DiscourseFan wrote: post #6

Very scary indeed. I think for the first time in my life I will be a little on edge flying in the US. You always hear that flying is the safest mode of public transport--well, if this is the state of the ATC, we're definitely in trouble. And you know there won't be any real change until hundreds of people die needlessly...I just hope it won't be my flight.

> I will be a little on edge flying in the US

That doesn't make sense. The article is concerning, but the USA still has a solid track-record for aviation safety, and its airlines in particular have a fatal crash rate of effectively zero. (Non-airline aviation is a different world.)

There's a slim but real chance one of us will die in a car crash. There's essentially zero chance either of us will die in an airliner crash. That would still be true even if we were both airline pilots.

Re: Air traffic controllers pushed to the brink

#233

Post by Angostura »

Roark66 wrote: post #204
rplnt wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pedestrian deaths also increase because cars are getting bigger - reduced visibility, much more energy, and worse impact zones. Cities should really start to regulate what kind of cars under what conditions they let mix in with people.

Sadly, we're going in the other direction. For example yesterday the capital city of Poland (Warsaw) decided, despite a lot of protests, to restrict "old cars" from entering a number of central districts. "Old cars" will mean diesels older that 18 years initially, 13 years later and petrol cars older than 20 years. The protesters proposed the rules are amended to block cars based on their emissions instead (which wou…

Restricting diesels older than 18 years old is perfectly reasonable - the amount of PM 2.5 those things put out significantly contribute to childhood asthma etc.

By comparison, London's ULEZ restricts diesels older than 2016.

Of course there's no reason why vehicles couldn't be restricted both on CO2 AND PM 2.5 emissions, if you want to promote small, clean cars

Re: Air traffic controllers pushed to the brink

#234

Post by davedx »

raffraffraff wrote: post #199
screye wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traffic fatalities decrease because cars are getting safer. But the number or accidents per capita might not be. Pedestrian deaths have certainly been on the rise. https://www.ghsa.org/sites/default/files/publications/files/...

People are driving spaceship-sized SUVs while using their phones, hitting pedestrians who are walking around looking at their phones, jumping out of the path of an oncoming 12yo doing 40kmh on a battery powered scooter while looking at porn on their phones and using Whatsapp to schedule a meet up with their Fastgas supplier. Their parents think that a scooter is a toy, the phone is so that they can call home, and the…

In the Netherlands ebikes are a game changer because many people can now commute between cities on a bike (bike lanes are alongside motorways too). But they are so fast! There’s been an increase in dangerous accidents with them, particularly among the older generations.

Electrification is great but it has risks too.

Re: Air traffic controllers pushed to the brink

#235

Post by HPsquared »

ddeck wrote: post #159
pama wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

17000000 Deaths per billion flights for the space shuttle is not safe. This is more than 2,000 times more dangerous than skydiving, which is also not very safe.

It was significantly worse than that. There were 2 failures over a total of 135 flights, with 14 fatalities. So that's about 103 fatalities per 1000 flights. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle

I think it's "passenger fatalities per passenger-journey". So need to multiply the number of flights by the crew on each.

Re: Air traffic controllers pushed to the brink

#236

Post by someplaceguy »

Gud wrote: post #124
someplaceguy wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean, it nets out? Shouldn't the car trips from/to the airport mean that an airplane journey is even more dangerous, as you can't really fly without those additional car trips?

Yes you can. I usually take the train to the airport.

Sure, but two additional train trips also increase the total danger of the flight...

Re: Air traffic controllers pushed to the brink

#237

Post by quickthrower2 »

akira2501 wrote: post #205
oatmeal1 wrote: post #77

People are seriously concerned with aircraft near misses when we let cars kill 45,000 Americans a year. Absurdity.

50% of accidents are single vehicle accidents that involve drugs or alcohol. It's more if you add in youth an inexperience. So, _most_ vehicle deaths are self-inflicted. 16% are pedestrians. They usually get hit from behind, and even if they don't, almost always at night. 16% are motorcycles. I ride. I love riding, but the reason for that statistic is obvious. There's zero safety margin when you're on one. Finally, t…

Wat?!

You can compare them. Ok if you are being pedantic you need to compare the airline, route, plane model and weather characteristic's with an equivalent car journey route, car model, mechanical condition and driver experience and mental fortitude.

But in general planes are way safer than cars.

If you are 40, perfect vision, sober as a saint in a modern safe car and drive mostly on highways at safe speeds you are still safer in a plane.

Re: Air traffic controllers pushed to the brink

#238

Post by spacecadet »

phreeza wrote: post #218
fifteenforty wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps, maybe, mass infection by a virus that affects the brain and vascular system has consequences for society.

It's an interesting hypothesis but should be easy to corroborate with other data, e.g. test scores. I would assume we'd have heard of that?

Isnt it a growing opinion of American teachers that students are underprepared? probably a combination of covid and remote learning... I doubt we will see the long term effects of this any time soon.

Re: Air traffic controllers pushed to the brink

#239

Post by uoaei »

rowanG077 wrote: post #225
sinuhe69 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same as the PISA scores. PISA, which might not be well known is the US, is the International Student Assessment for the 15 years old students in the OECD (and non-OECD) countries. The PISA measures their ability to use their reading, mathematics and science knowledge and skills to meet real-life challenges. The PISA scores for 2022 is the lowest in the history of PISA and show a clear trend downward since 2012. T…

I'm not sure phones can explain it. Even when I was in high school 10 years ago everyone had a smartphone with social media.

You didn't have the same platforms nor the same dynamics on them. Social media has evolved over the past decade.

Re: Air traffic controllers pushed to the brink

#240

Post by OJFord »

logicchains wrote: post #227
orciny wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure where this has come from. First degree heart block (ie a PR interval > 0.2) is not a marker of mild ‘cardio’ (NB: it’s cardiac) injury. It does not cause syncope. It is a reflection of electrical timing between the cardiac chambers. It is not an echocardiogram or a RHC and will tell you nothing about the anatomy or physiology of a person’s heart other than timing. It is not a full electrophysiological st…

>There is no such entity as ‘mild cardio injury’ and I suggest you stop spreading nonsense. Pilots already have strict medical guidance for health and unexplained syncope is not something that is hand-waved away. A PR interval greater than 0.2 is considered "First-Degree Atrioventricular Block" ( https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/... ), which "occurs as a consequence of disease in the AV nod…

That's a symptom effectively, AV block is just ascribing a name to that description, it's not a disease or injury itself, though yes there may be some underlying cause of it.

It's not like they accidentally started permitting it, because if the rule was 'now pilots with first degree AV block are good to go' is the same thing as saying 'now pilots with PR interval >0.2s ...'.

Presumably they determined it's not a significant indicator of anything sufficiently bad or imminent in the 0.2-0.3 range.

Post reply on HN