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

101–110 of 750 posts

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#101

Post by fallingknife »

karlgkk wrote: post #90
sepositus wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

What I'm not quite convinced of is that it is the regulation that keeps the airlines following the manufacturers' specifications. I see what happens to stock prices when these companies screw up and they lose a lot more money to that than they ever to do fines from regulators. Are the regulations actually doing much here or are they just repeating what the airlines would do anyway because they have a massive incentive not to crash even if the regulations didn't exist?

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#102

Post by mint2 »

matthest wrote: post #64
marcusb wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I’m only 1/4 libertarian. I don’t think competition is enough. The risk of harm needs to be balanced as well. With airplanes, you have not only the risk to paying customers, but to bystanders who in many cases cannot be made whole in the event of an accident (i.e., you might get a financial settlement if an airplane crashes into your house, but that won’t bring your family members who were in the house back t…

I'm pro airline regulation given the current state of the market. But you could also argue the airline industry is fairly concentrated. There are only so many airlines. If a Delta flight crashes, you might still fly Delta again in the future, because there are only so many options. Now imagine if there were as many airlines as restaurants. If one Delta flight messes up in any way, people would never fly them again. T…

“They go out of business”… is that way to say they rebrand themselves and blend in with the crowd? As that seems highly likely with a theoretically crowded but not regulated airline market.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#103

Post by wat10000 »

827a wrote: post #40
HPMOR wrote: post #17

[flagged]

Simply not true. You can move the goal posts wherever you want to make it true and tell whatever political story you want, but there have been major aircraft incidents basically every year since forever in the United States.

When was the second-to-last time an airliner crashed in the US?

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#105

Post by yakshaving_jgt »

crazygringo wrote: post #30
0xjunhao wrote: post #29

Maybe we should build more railways. The ground is more stable than the air.

Just because the ground is more stable than the air doesn't mean there aren't train collisions. Air travel actually has a lower fatality rate per mile than trains do. Rail crossings can be dangerous places.

I feel more comfortable with the thought of applying the emergency brakes on a train versus applying the emergency brakes on an aeroplane.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#106

Post by nradov »

matthest wrote: post #64
marcusb wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I’m only 1/4 libertarian. I don’t think competition is enough. The risk of harm needs to be balanced as well. With airplanes, you have not only the risk to paying customers, but to bystanders who in many cases cannot be made whole in the event of an accident (i.e., you might get a financial settlement if an airplane crashes into your house, but that won’t bring your family members who were in the house back t…

I'm pro airline regulation given the current state of the market. But you could also argue the airline industry is fairly concentrated. There are only so many airlines. If a Delta flight crashes, you might still fly Delta again in the future, because there are only so many options. Now imagine if there were as many airlines as restaurants. If one Delta flight messes up in any way, people would never fly them again. T…

Even if AI robots somehow replaced all of the airline employees it still wouldn't be economically viable to have more than about four major airlines covering routes between all major US airports. The limiting factor is gate access. If we wanted to make room in the market for more airlines then we would have to expand most airports, or build new ones.

There are a number of smaller airlines competing with the big players but they have limited route networks and little opportunity to expand.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#107

Post by vkou »

matthest wrote: post #87
vkou wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 whe…

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

Given that they don't give me a tour of the kitchen, and that I can't actually verify that they haven't been using meat knives to cut my salad, no.

I take it on faith that the food inspectors will ruin their business[1] if they are regularly pulling those kinds of stunts. I take it on faith that the staff have regulations to lean on when they push back on systemic unsanitary practices.

And no, Joe Somebody complaining on reddit that Earl's gave him food poisoning last week and that we should stay away from Earl's doesn't actually inform me that I should avoid Earl's. I don't know Joe, I have no reason to believe him. For all I know, he's just a disgruntled shill who is just making stuff up. Or maybe Earl's bought a batch of contaminated products from further upstream. Or maybe he caught a stomach bug from somewhere else, and is blaming them. Or maybe he's right, but Earl's actually has a lower incidence of food poisoning than the chicken joint across the street, and they just got unlucky.

I have a lot more confidence in an inspection, than in some noise someone's making on the internet, or in some celebrity endorsement on the TV.

---

But there is some aspect of eating at a restaurant where I do make an informed choice.

Does the food look good? Does it taste good? Is it cheap?

These are the easy to observe bits of information about it. I can actually meaningfully express my preference there, and make an informed decision.

And guess what? There aren't any inspectors for any of that. My town doesn't employ a taste comissar, or an art critic for their FoodSafe team. Because I can tell at a glance which I prefer.

I can't tell at a glance which restaurant is less likely to have the kitchen staff poison me.

---

[1] In practice, they'd much rather work with the business to bring it into compliance. You know, positive-sum sort of interactions that leave everyone who is acting in good faith better off.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#108

Post by alistairSH »

chrisco255 wrote: post #63
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.

Did it roll after landing or before landing?

I saw a report that it was after touchdown.

I’m guessing wind, ice, or something else moved the plane off the centerline and into a crab, it hooked a wheel off the pavement, and cartwheeled. 100% conjecture at this point, just seems like a possible chain of events.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#109

Post by declan_roberts »

redcobra762 wrote: post #96
userbinator wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Toronto is in a different country than the FAA.

American company, taking off from an American airport with mostly American passengers. The only thing about this flight that wasn’t American is the destination…

Thanks for pointing this out. I was worried something might be fundamentally wrong with airlines, but now I can rest assured that it was just Trump all along.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#110

Post by CivBase »

lumost wrote: post #98
CivBase wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did the plane flip? Do we have any reason to believe it could be reasonably avoided with regulations?

Maintenance is a regulatory problem. Otherwise it’s a race to the bottom looking for someone to sign off on a flight.

Do we have reason to believe this was a maintenance issue?
Post reply on HN