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

Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 750 posts

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#81

Post by vkou »

matthest wrote: post #74
vkou wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boar's Head is performing just fine, despite having the walls of their meatpacking facilities covered in flies and maggots . That killed eleven people last year, but guess what, every friggin' deli in the country is prominently displaying their products, and sales are doing great. And for all I know, half the other brands on the shelf are owned and operated by them. If it weren't for regulators, that facility would s…

We're actually in complete agreement over this scenario. In my original comment, I discussed why you can't have no regulations in an industry that's highly concentrated. Deregulating only works if and only if the underlying industry is highly competitive. The meatpacking industry is not highly competitive: https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2024/january/concentrat... Hence, regulations are needed.

You're completely missing the root of the problem, which is informational assymmetry.

Having multiple vendors to choose from doesn't do anything for me when I can't make an informed choice.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#82

Post by dotBen »

wkat4242 wrote: post #69
RachelF wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also looks like a wing has been ripped off. That passengers could survive an accident involving so much force is surprising.

True but I have a feeling it might be designed to rip off in this situation. I'm more surprised the wing rupture didn't cause a fire/explosion because this is where most of the fuel is stored.

Planes typically land with little fuel left (obviously enough for emergencies etc but they are practically empty, it's safer and more efficient)

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#85

Post by apercu »

kanbankaren wrote: post #83
apercu wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Dude, this happened in Toronto, Canada.

Yea. Totally man. A country in which I am a citizen. But an American airline and in a time where aspects of society are trying to deregulate everything.

(maybe I should qualify all of my internet comments that I spent 29 years in the US, then 18 years in Canada, and now like 2 years back in the US. Would that help?)

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#86

Post by genter »

userbinator wrote: post #78
sva_ wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And another one https://old.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/1iruc70/vid... --- On a side note, it is crazy someone would take a selfie video before exiting a crashed airplane.

On a side note, it is crazy someone would take a selfie video before exiting a crashed airplane. It's literally once in a lifetime, and it didn't look like anyone was in serious danger after they realised they'd survived.

It's not unusual for people in a plane crash to survive, then die from smoke inhalation because the people in front of them took too long to evacuate the plane.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#87

Post by matthest »

vkou wrote: post #81
matthest wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're actually in complete agreement over this scenario. In my original comment, I discussed why you can't have no regulations in an industry that's highly concentrated. Deregulating only works if and only if the underlying industry is highly competitive. The meatpacking industry is not highly competitive: https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2024/january/concentrat... Hence, regulations are needed.

You're completely missing the root of the problem, which is informational assymmetry. Having multiple vendors to choose from doesn't do anything for me when I can't make an informed choice .

When you eat at a restaurant, are you making an informed choice?

I'd argue no. I have no idea if the cook that made my meal 30 seconds ago actually followed proper safety guidelines.

However, I think in general, the probability is decent that they did, as they are highly incentivized to do so. Because a failure to do so could mean the end of their business.

What I'm getting at is that there are specific scenarios where market forces are stronger than the ability to make an informed choice. And protect you as the consumer better.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#88

Post by stouset »

wkat4242 wrote: post #69
RachelF wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also looks like a wing has been ripped off. That passengers could survive an accident involving so much force is surprising.

True but I have a feeling it might be designed to rip off in this situation. I'm more surprised the wing rupture didn't cause a fire/explosion because this is where most of the fuel is stored.

I seriously, seriously doubt it. The wings are so utterly critical to flight I can’t possibly imagine any situation they’d be engineered to snap off under. Further, that’s where the fuel is and any crash involving a wing rupture is dramatically more dangerous given the risk of fire.

Hell even in a crash landing like this you want the plane to stay upright and stable.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#89

Post by dboreham »

bell-cot wrote: post #21
lukev wrote: post #18

[flagged]

> I don't understand why... Spend some time talking to a Libertarian zealot. Not saying that you should believe any of their assertions. Let alone adopt their worldview. But you might get a sense of how less-government-is-always-better "logic" works.

[flagged]

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#90

Post by karlgkk »

sepositus wrote: post #59
lukev wrote: post #18

[flagged]

> so poor regulation could possibly be implicated Can you work out the logical connection for someone who wouldn't understand it?

There is incredible amounts of regulation around plane, maintenance. From specification of parts, to maintenance schedules, even all the way down to purity and composition of the materials.

This regulation is used to make sure that all airlines that operate in the US adhere to the strict and narrow requirements from the manufacturers and the safety testing done.

Whether or not you or other people ideologically agree with heavy regulations around this stuff is a whole separate conversation. Considering the complexity of this industry, I’d say that overall they’ve done a pretty good job.

That aside, whenever a major incident like this happens, it almost always means those regulations were incorrect, violated, or didn’t cover a specific scenario (increasingly rare). There will be extensive reviews, that will take months, if not years, to determine how to prevent something like this from happening again. Sometimes it’s regulation, sometimes it’s updates to pilot guidelines and training. Sometimes it’s something else.

Post reply on HN