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

291–300 of 515 posts

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

#291

Post by d1sxeyes »

sokoloff wrote: post #180
morsch wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The number of fatalities and injuries seems minuscule because it's normalised over distance traveled. This makes sense, because air travel is the only way to make voyages over this distance. But it also doesn't make sense for the same reason -- it's stupid to compare a 6000 mile holiday flight with a 6000 mile holiday road trip, because people don't routinely make those. You're still more likely to get injured on an…

I know people who are already at the "if driving takes less than 8 hours, I'd rather drive than fly" level. Every additional inconvenience (or psychological impediment) added to the safest mode of long-distance travel has a risk of decreasing overall safety. It's not particularly relevant to an international flight into Japan, but the extent to which increasing annoyance/instilling fear of airline passengers causing…

For other people who might not have followed completely: the NTAB don’t say (explicitly) that forcing children to occupy a seat of their own would result in 60 times as many deaths. They estimated the risk of lap infant deaths as 1 every 10 years, and then they estimated that if the cost of travel increased for families, enough families would instead choose to drive that 60 infants would die in road accidents in that same 10 year period.

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

#292

Post by rootusrootus »

konschubert wrote: post #147
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a car autopilot system that good on the market that only you know about? And that can replace the driver completely?

Waymo is safer than a human driver already. https://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/googles-waymo-safe... Of course there will be locations where humans are required, but we can already start using computers in those locations where they perform better.

> Waymo is safer than a human driver already.

Is that data controlled for environment? I.e. it must only compare Waymo driving with human drivers in exactly the same environment. Same road, same conditions, same time, etc. Waymo doesn't take any difficult routes.

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

#293

Post by Nextgrid »

asystole wrote: post #54
__m wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ASDE-X should warn the controller, not sure if it's installed at that airport

I'm in the realm of pure speculation here, but does ASDE-X to some extent rely on a/c having mode B transponders, which I've seen people saying the coastguard Dash-8s didn't have? If this is the textbook runway incursion it appears to be then it does seem incredible it wasn't caught by runway safety systems.

I wonder if another system can use lasers/light beams to detect obstructions on the runway? Rather than relying on vehicles actively reporting their positions (which can malfunction, and as far as I know only aircraft are equipped - cars/trucks/snow clearing vehicles don't have it), it would instead just check whether there's anything on the runway and alert the controller (and ideally any approaching planes via the ILS antennas) that the runway is obstructed?

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

#294

Post by sokoloff »

d1sxeyes wrote: post #291
sokoloff wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know people who are already at the "if driving takes less than 8 hours, I'd rather drive than fly" level. Every additional inconvenience (or psychological impediment) added to the safest mode of long-distance travel has a risk of decreasing overall safety. It's not particularly relevant to an international flight into Japan, but the extent to which increasing annoyance/instilling fear of airline passengers causing…

For other people who might not have followed completely: the NTAB don’t say (explicitly) that forcing children to occupy a seat of their own would result in 60 times as many deaths. They estimated the risk of lap infant deaths as 1 every 10 years, and then they estimated that if the cost of travel increased for families, enough families would instead choose to drive that 60 infants would die in road accidents in that…

Thanks for posting that. It was perfectly clear in my head, but I really made a hash of describing it when summarizing it my post upthread.

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

#295

Post by lxgr »

SoftTalker wrote: post #260
steveBK123 wrote: post #59

This is why you follow cabin crew instructions and DO NOT CARRY YOUR LUGGAGE out of the aircraft in an emergency. Your luggage is not worth more than a fellow passengers life. Contrast this with evacuation footage of western passenger planes..

I like to think that in a real emergency (crash landing, fire visible outside, smoke entering the cabin) survival instinct will kick in and people will just GTFO without worrying about luggage. The videos I've seen of people evacuating with luggage seem a little less serious. That said, an evacuation is always serious. People often do get hurt coming down those slides so the crew only order an evacuation if they thin…

> in a real emergency (crash landing, fire visible outside, smoke entering the cabin) survival instinct will kick in and people will just GTFO without worrying about luggage

Unfortunately, that's not always the case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_1492#Evacuatio...

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

#296

Post by amelius »

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…

> Looks like trading long term flammability for initial rigidity lived up to the design intent.

What if a plane catches fire in midair?

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

#297

Post by FrustratedMonky »

jefftk wrote: post #247
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm mistaking that with "Law of truly large numbers" With a huge number, it is possible to make something look reasonable or un-reasonable. Wasting billions of hours of peoples time. Sounds bad, we should get rid of that. But that is also the time when people should be watching the safety video. Which can impact a few lives. Like remembering where the safety doors are. Maybe this is more along those lines. http…

> that is also the time when people should be watching the safety video I thought we were talking about the most dangerous parts of a flight, takeoff and landing, which are not when the safety video (or presentation) happens? > With a huge number, it is possible to make something look reasonable or un-reasonable. Wasting billions of hours of peoples time. Sounds bad, we should get rid of that. I agree that we're not…

Yes, take off and landing.

Typically the phones have to be off by the time the safety video is happening. I think they do this on purpose so you are paying attention. Seems like they occur very close together.

I might be assuming too much overlap, like if there is longer delay waiting on tarmac. There probably is a lot of variance in this, so maybe it isn't really good point.

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

#299

Post by lxgr »

CrimsonCape wrote: post #268

Pilots increasingly seem to have an iPad with some kind of apps. Do you have experience with this? In terms of redundant systems, seems kinda obvious that if you look at a flight tracker on your ipad and see a plane on your runway, you don't land...

These apps usually use ADS-B as received by various community-operated receivers.

This introduces a lag of several seconds, doesn't guarantee reception in tricky situations (such as planes flying very low, as during the final approach, or on the ground), and is limited to the planes' own position fix accuracy, which is orders of magnitude too coarse for this use case.

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

#300

Post by pi-e-sigma »

porkbeer wrote: post #219
konschubert wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I step into the elevator door, it doesn’t squash me and the elevator won’t move.

Usually. Liveleak will show hundreds of exceptions however.

Liveleak was shut down more than 2 years ago
Post reply on HN