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

JAL A359 at Tokyo collided with Coast Guard DH8C on runway and burst into flames

avherald.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 515 posts

Re: JAL A359 at Tokyo collided with Coast Guard DH8C on runway and burst into flames

#21

Post by borissk »

resolutebat wrote: post #18
borissk wrote: post #11

[flagged]

Nope, that narrative was largely a myth. The people at the back by and large died instantly in the crash, without even time to undo their seatbelts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_1492#Evacuatio...

Hmmmm, there were plenty of videos of people with hand luggage outside the plane - surely taking this luggage was against the rules and has slowed down the evacuation. I won't be surprised if TASS is just trying to cover the story. I think it was a different Russian crash were the pilots were given state medals for saving the passengers. A later investigation found these same pilots were responsible for the crash. The powers that be decided that instead of admitting they were wrong, revoking the medals and sending the pilots to prison they'll just cover up the whole story.

Re: JAL A359 at Tokyo collided with Coast Guard DH8C on runway and burst into flames

#22

Post by kzrdude »

brunohaid wrote: post #4

Definitely better links than Daily Mirror out there, avherald.com unfortunately overwhelmed, but in terms of discussion: - Crazy how well the carbon fiber A350 held up given that it seems to have landed pretty much directly on a Dash 8 (RIP Coast Guard team). Looks like trading long term flammability for initial rigidity lived up to the design intent. - Excellent evacuation job, especially as it looks like on some vi…

It's somewhat reassuring to see an actual video of those chutes being used for evacuation, just never saw it before.

Re: JAL A359 at Tokyo collided with Coast Guard DH8C on runway and burst into flames

#23

Post by aidog »

yzydserd wrote: post #5

Not sure why the link is a UK Tabloid. Japan’s national broadcaster has a video of the moment of impact. Impact: https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20240102_302/ All ~400 airbus passengers safe. Coastguard plane in earthquake relief efforts hit airbus (see video). 5 of 6 passengers unaccounted for.

5 people dead aboard the coast guard plane that was responding to yesterdays earthquake. The airbus is still on fire

https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20240102/k10014307191000.ht...

Re: JAL A359 at Tokyo collided with Coast Guard DH8C on runway and burst into flames

#25

Post by konschubert »

epolanski wrote: post #7

I'll speculate: this looks like textbook runway invasion where miscommunication leads to two different aircrafts being allowed on a runway at the same time. Reminds me of LATAM 2213, which led to the very first Airbus 320 neo being written off [1]. Essentially, clearance to enter a runway has to be expressively given and confirmed in non-ubiquitous language ("Flight ABC requesting clearance to enter runway 01"). Yet…

it is crazy to me that all of this still relies on humans giving verbal clearance over radio.

Shouldn’t there be a universal standard to communicate clearances to the computer systems of the airplanes and other runway vehicles? And shouldn’t there be a small, well-tested core system that makes sure clearance never conflicts?

How on earth does all this still depend on skilled individuals not making a mistake?

We got over this in other domains long ago.

Re: JAL A359 at Tokyo collided with Coast Guard DH8C on runway and burst into flames

#26

Post by [deleted] »

epolanski wrote: post #7

I'll speculate: this looks like textbook runway invasion where miscommunication leads to two different aircrafts being allowed on a runway at the same time. Reminds me of LATAM 2213, which led to the very first Airbus 320 neo being written off [1]. Essentially, clearance to enter a runway has to be expressively given and confirmed in non-ubiquitous language ("Flight ABC requesting clearance to enter runway 01"). Yet…

[deleted]

Re: JAL A359 at Tokyo collided with Coast Guard DH8C on runway and burst into flames

#29

Post by bamboozled »

konschubert wrote: post #25
epolanski wrote: post #7

I'll speculate: this looks like textbook runway invasion where miscommunication leads to two different aircrafts being allowed on a runway at the same time. Reminds me of LATAM 2213, which led to the very first Airbus 320 neo being written off [1]. Essentially, clearance to enter a runway has to be expressively given and confirmed in non-ubiquitous language ("Flight ABC requesting clearance to enter runway 01"). Yet…

it is crazy to me that all of this still relies on humans giving verbal clearance over radio. Shouldn’t there be a universal standard to communicate clearances to the computer systems of the airplanes and other runway vehicles? And shouldn’t there be a small, well-tested core system that makes sure clearance never conflicts? How on earth does all this still depend on skilled individuals not making a mistake? We got o…

Maybe there is a good reason for it ? Wait for the answer before giving them judgment.

You might be right, but there might be a valid answer.

Re: JAL A359 at Tokyo collided with Coast Guard DH8C on runway and burst into flames

#30

Post by tonmoy »

konschubert wrote: post #25
epolanski wrote: post #7

I'll speculate: this looks like textbook runway invasion where miscommunication leads to two different aircrafts being allowed on a runway at the same time. Reminds me of LATAM 2213, which led to the very first Airbus 320 neo being written off [1]. Essentially, clearance to enter a runway has to be expressively given and confirmed in non-ubiquitous language ("Flight ABC requesting clearance to enter runway 01"). Yet…

it is crazy to me that all of this still relies on humans giving verbal clearance over radio. Shouldn’t there be a universal standard to communicate clearances to the computer systems of the airplanes and other runway vehicles? And shouldn’t there be a small, well-tested core system that makes sure clearance never conflicts? How on earth does all this still depend on skilled individuals not making a mistake? We got o…

I doubt your “other domains” are as safe and reliable as the aviation industry. An automated system may be possible to make, but will require a huge undertaking to bring even close to the current safety standards, and would introduce its own safety issues
Post reply on HN