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

261–270 of 310 posts

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

#261

Post by OJFord »

psunavy03 wrote: post #190
OJFord wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

There's a reason it doesn't. The last thing any pilot or controller would want is to have something sensationalized or misconstrued and then spewed all over social media.

I don't think that's a reason, they're not secret (the YouTube reconstructors I mentioned (legally) get them after all - there are public if paid archives) they're just not available on that system. Just like all kinds of other stuff isn't. I think it's simply niche interest. Plus it's only any good when you haven't taken off yet and are about to land, i.e. the times cabin crew will do what they can to have you not enjoy any kind of entertainment whatsoever anyway.

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

#262

Post by MBlume »

rpmisms wrote: post #204
nayuki wrote: post #199

Great article. I agree a lot with the safety culture in commercial aviation and the commitment to investigate and fix root causes. Now can we please apply the same standards to car crashes? The same human errors and bad infrastructure keep getting repeated over and over again. And the problems are getting worse, with SUVs and distracted driving on the rise. See https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/ for a community that…

r/fuckcars has members who deflate and slash car tires that belong to vehicles they deem "too big". Do you support that methodology?

I would never recommend this methodology to a friend or a family member. Drivers are vindictive, violent people and the risk is too high to be worth it.

Still, I appreciate the people who do it.

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

#263

Post by P_I_Staker »

nayuki wrote: post #237
P_I_Staker wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unpopular opinion, but the truth: We have to drive and it's a right. I agree about the infrastructure issues. Still the modern "safe driving" mentality that people want is at odds with that REALITY. This could change with public transit, however we don't do this. Even the best countries fall short, and most don't get close. It's actively discouraged in the USA. Actually, you could argue that people already have to de…

Mostly agreed, except for: > We have to drive and it's a right. WTF? Driving is by definition a privilege. You're maneuvering a 2-ton murder machine. We got into the current mess because people treat driving as a right - I have to have parking, I have to get there fast, I have to bend everything society to fit my car. And when someone gets caught for a DUI, judges go lenient because they know that taking away their l…

The point was to give an UNpopular opinion. The current driving system is a joke in need of reform. The poor suffer the most.

IMO people just need to cut some of the BS with this driving stuff. I don't think judges really go particularly leniently anymore. You can't function without a car.

The reality is that we probably need to accept that driving is here to stay as a basic NEED and act accordingly. Certain people that are extremely dangerous drivers are going to get their rights curtailed, however we should also support everyone functioning in society.

I think we need to get closer to the system I saw in Netherlands, however IMO it really fell short of what I want to see. Until we surpass this, I think we just need to accept driving.

Lots of jurisdictions, even in EU have vast areas with poor service. Most cities I've been in would be fine with public transit. It's networks of large population centers that can be easily connected, especially with good bike culture we could be just like the Netherlands. It's large swaths of the non-city land that contain people and towns that would be a challenge.

You can't just not drive. It raises alarm bells and attracts unwanted attention. I'm not the only one that's experienced this, I think you can find this on /r/fuckcars. An employer almost called the cops on me once. It's fucking weird. That's not even getting into how unsafe it can be.

How can we pretend this is a "privilege"? IMO it's like calling healthcare a privilege (which btw I also think is a right)

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

#264

Post by rpmisms »

MBlume wrote: post #262
rpmisms wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

r/fuckcars has members who deflate and slash car tires that belong to vehicles they deem "too big". Do you support that methodology?

I would never recommend this methodology to a friend or a family member. Drivers are vindictive, violent people and the risk is too high to be worth it. Still, I appreciate the people who do it.

And I hope they all go to prison. Used to be you'd be hanged for stealing a horse. Taking a person's means of transport is evil. I am, indeed, a vindictive and violent driver, apparently.

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

#265

Post by MBlume »

npteljes wrote: post #215
ylhert wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cognitive dissonance people have around this issue is astonishing. We are willing to ground the 737MAX fleet when a few people get a (surely terrifying) open air flying experience; but 44,000 people are killed on the road in the US _every_ year (and rising!) and very few people seem to care. In most age cohorts, death by car is the largest killer. In the US you have a 1 in 107 chance of dying in a car crash in yo…

I too have thought a lot about this cognitive dissonance. I think that there are several differences to the two issues, and so, in people's attitude towards it too. One, I think, is that flying is something that is being done to us, and driving is something that we do ourselves. So the agency, the point of view is very different. Something bad happening while being passive is much more horrifying because of the power…

If you're a child, or someone too disabled to drive, driving is consistently something being done to you

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

#266

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

izacus wrote: post #33
josephg wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the number of data breaches we see cropping up, I wonder if a similar law could be written to hold companies liable for the safe handling of personal data.

TBH having software engineer output in general be liable to some minimum safety, correctness and quality standard would be a god send for the world. But of course the developers will revolt against that.

> and quality standard

This is my life: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEC_62304

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

#267

Post by rpmisms »

Orangeair wrote: post #218
rpmisms wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/xr64d8/deflating_... https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/xo6uqu/my_option_... Cursory search turned these up.

I don't necessarily know that you can conclude from a few memes that people are actually out there doing this, I see it more as venting frustration. They're certainly advocating for it, though.

I have seen it IRL.

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

#268

Post by mattrick »

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…

I've been obsessed with the US Chemical Safety Board videos on YouTube that describe in great detail the events that lead up to industrial accidents. One of the common themes I've seen among them is that there's usually some sort of warning sign or near miss that goes ignored by the people responsible for them since they don't cause any major damage. Then a few days or months later that system fails in an entirely predictable way with catastrophic consequences. A good example of this is the fatal phosgene gas release at a DuPont chemical plant[1].

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISNGimMXL7M

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

#269

Post by ongytenes »

Crashed once in Nassau when I was a kid. Brakes failed on the left side on a Beechcraft Model 18, spun the plane around on touchdown. Slid sideways down the runway, broke the landing gear then rolled breaking the left wing. Everyone splashed through fuel walking away. There was no fire.

A year later I almost crashed in St Thomas in another Model 18. That was pilot error. Carburetor heat was on and we took all the runway trying to get off the ground. We took off towards the ocean and flew a long way so close to the water that we were sucking water up and spraying the plane. I was blissfully unaware as a kid. Thought the pilot was playing around.

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

#270

Post by psunavy03 »

histriosum wrote: post #251
Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've listened to liveatc.net, and then took a flight in an Extra 330LS stunt plane and got to listen to ATC from an actual headset... ...and I can't understand hardly a word they say. Even having a slight idea of the phraseology from countless hours in MSFS and watching VATSIM streams on Twitch, when it comes to the real thing, they talk so fast and there's so much static that it blows my mind that anybody can unders…

Commercial rated pilot here. It's definitely a bit of a learned skill, but it doesn't honestly take that long to learn, and it works better than any other alternative might. The most important thing is for everyone in the system to be willing to speak up if they don't clearly understand what's been said to them. "Say again slower" is a perfectly acceptable response, and is a required one of a pilot or controller who…

As former aviator working in tech it, amuses me how periodically on this site, someone learns how the aviation community is flying around using GPS and simple UHF/VHF radios and NAVAIDs, immediately goes into a tizzy about how unsecure and hackable it allegedly is, and then goes round the bend about things like encrypted comms and starts answering a question no one asked.

Like, sure, in the military there's the ability to do various and sundry things to secure your comms and navigation which are not worth discussing here. But in the civilian world, there's largely no reason to go to the trouble and expense.

Post reply on HN