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

Why you've never been in a plane crash

asteriskmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 310 posts

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#11

Post by Vecr »

moring wrote: post #8

Related: CAST analysis http://sunnyday.mit.edu/CAST-Handbook.pdf Intended to focus on maximal learning about all factors that contributed to an accident. It subsumes several approaches, including a blameless analysis and that each factor doesn't just have a single "cause" but that different factors form a network of interaction. Also nitpicking about the headline: You haven't been in a place crash because you wouldn'…

Yeah, probably, and the counterfactual where airlines were worse at preventing crashes would probably have worse crash survival rates as well. Maybe planes bumping into each other at very low speeds on the ground would skew the stats in that case, but you know what I mean by "plane crash".

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#12

Post by ssl232 »

One of the most important pieces of legislation in the UK that helped improve safety in workplaces was the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, which placed a duty of care on organisations to look after the wellbeing of their staff. One of the tenets is to take near misses seriously. According to a health and safety engineer in a course I attended, near misses are like gifts from the heavens, as they show you exactly how something could go wrong despite no one getting hurt, giving organisations a chance to improve their processes. If a workplace accident does occur, the Health and Safety Executive (who enforce the act in large organisations) can levy enormous fines for preventable accidents especially where there is evidence of a near miss beforehand.

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#13

Post by ptaipale »

moring wrote: post #8

Related: CAST analysis http://sunnyday.mit.edu/CAST-Handbook.pdf Intended to focus on maximal learning about all factors that contributed to an accident. It subsumes several approaches, including a blameless analysis and that each factor doesn't just have a single "cause" but that different factors form a network of interaction. Also nitpicking about the headline: You haven't been in a place crash because you wouldn'…

In fact about 90 % of plane crashes are survivable and people read about their own accidenyäts.

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#14

Post by jasonkester »

moring wrote: post #8

Related: CAST analysis http://sunnyday.mit.edu/CAST-Handbook.pdf Intended to focus on maximal learning about all factors that contributed to an accident. It subsumes several approaches, including a blameless analysis and that each factor doesn't just have a single "cause" but that different factors form a network of interaction. Also nitpicking about the headline: You haven't been in a place crash because you wouldn'…

I don't know... I once met a guy who had survived two of them:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7370320

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#16

Post by dotancohen »

rob74 wrote: post #2

...by Kyra Dempsey, a.k.a. Admiral Cloudberg, who has a long series of in-depth airplane crash investigation articles on Medium: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/ This is her Medium article on the LAX runway collision: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/cleared-to-collide-the-c... - with further details that would probably have distracted from the point she's trying to make in the Asterisk article (e.g. that the…

The USAir 1493 crash happened in 1991, a decade after the PATCO controllers were fired. I have a hard time believing that there is any connection - by 1986 or 87 the controller position has already been fully properly staffed with trained controllers. Throwing the mention of PATCO in a discussion of a 1991 incident would just further a political agenda and add nothing to the discussion.

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#17

Post by bertil »

gooddeed wrote: post #6
palad1n wrote: post #5

This is the first time I've heard of "just culture" and wish it would spread to other areas of the world and life.

The ability to drop blame from the equation is a credit to the aviation industry and would drastically improve any team, organisation, or industry to adopt it.

When the conference LeadDev happens in London, they often have Nickolas Means give a talk about an aeronautic topic. It’s usually 45 minutes of nail-biting in-depth analysis of a very complicated problem, and ends with a 5 minute rotation to how the lessons from that incident apply to engineering management in general. (You also feel like you could engineer an airplane, but no you can’t: that’s just Nickolas’ talent for explanation that is fooling you. Airplanes are very hard to make.)

This is all done in such a smart, seamless, obvious way to deliver a lesson that would make the Brothers Grimm feel cheated.

Strongly recommend.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sIzfGzf_50

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=099cHWSbAL8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rOPAYoR80M

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#18

Post by kqr »

moring wrote: post #8

Related: CAST analysis http://sunnyday.mit.edu/CAST-Handbook.pdf Intended to focus on maximal learning about all factors that contributed to an accident. It subsumes several approaches, including a blameless analysis and that each factor doesn't just have a single "cause" but that different factors form a network of interaction. Also nitpicking about the headline: You haven't been in a place crash because you wouldn'…

Whoever got curious enough to enter this comment section: carve out some time to read the CAST handbook. It changed how I look at accidents but also how I look at organisations and the rest of the world. Should be mandatory reading for anyone in any position of responsibility.

I have long wanted to write a review/summary of it on my blog but it's so dense in useful content it's hard to compress further. (There's a reason I have not published it so please try not to judge it for its rough edges, but this is what the draft looked like when I gave up last time: https://two-wrongs.com/root-cause-analysis-youre-doing-it-wr...)

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#19

Post by bertil »

ssl232 wrote: post #12

One of the most important pieces of legislation in the UK that helped improve safety in workplaces was the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, which placed a duty of care on organisations to look after the wellbeing of their staff. One of the tenets is to take near misses seriously. According to a health and safety engineer in a course I attended, near misses are like gifts from the heavens, as they show you exactly…

Very true.

In general, I think that piece has a bit of a European blind side when starting by “The United States leads the world in airline safety.”

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#20

Post by OJFord »

rob74 wrote: post #2

...by Kyra Dempsey, a.k.a. Admiral Cloudberg, who has a long series of in-depth airplane crash investigation articles on Medium: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/ This is her Medium article on the LAX runway collision: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/cleared-to-collide-the-c... - with further details that would probably have distracted from the point she's trying to make in the Asterisk article (e.g. that the…

And if you like this sort of thing, you might also enjoy the various people that do reconstructions on YouTube - the real audio played over animations/flight sim of what the planes are doing. The most interesting/lively ones are those with a 'possible pilot deviation' or 'number to call' IMO if you want a search term to narrow them down.

I'm not a pilot or planespotter or particularly interested in planes generally, I've just fallen down that rabbit hole a couple of times for some reason, can be quite interesting. It has made me wish the in-flight entertainment included a 'listen to pilot/tower comms' option.

Post reply on HN