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

Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 633 posts

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#81

Post by infecto »

moralestapia wrote: post #62
infecto wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know why people are always so quick to say whistleblowers are being purposely murdered. At any rate we need to wait to understand the details of this crash, so far sounding like engine failure possibly due to bird strikes.

[flagged]

“Now you know why.” - why even respond like this? You took some general statistics not specific to the population of people who are whistleblowers and just matter of factly make it a truth. It’s about as ridiculous as saying the person is murdered without any proof which I guess aligns with your thought process.

Being a whistleblower is ostracizing. Your colleagues and friends might no longer associate with you. It may put you in financial and family stress. You are in the news, you need to testify potentially. Sounds like a high stress situation.

I don’t know what is fact or fiction in this case but I can also assume some percentage of the population that do decide to become a whistleblower may also have other stresses or crises going on that maybe further their motivation to become a whistleblower. I say this cautiously because I don’t know this case specifically.

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#83

Post by changoplatanero »

ajross wrote: post #76
mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was just watching something the other day about how jet engines have gotten more efficient and powerful over the last 50 years where commercial airliners really only need 2 engines. All 2 engine aircraft also have to be able to operate on 1 engine as well if there is a failure. One has to wonder if this was a bird strike incident on both engines that maybe having 4 engines would have allowed the plane to circle bac…

I don't think there's ever been a double-bird-strike incident, though. And what dual engine failures I can think of are due to failure of a shared system (e.g. fuel exhaustion, c.f. Gimli Glider). [Edit: yeah, yeah, forgot the Tom Hanks movie, sue me. I do wish folks would respond to the much more important point below, which isn't invalidated by a single data point though.] Constructing solutions for multiple-mode f…

> I don't think there's ever been a double-bird-strike incident, though

There was this very famous double bird strike https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#84

Post by bartread »

defrost wrote: post #71
mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was just watching something the other day about how jet engines have gotten more efficient and powerful over the last 50 years where commercial airliners really only need 2 engines. All 2 engine aircraft also have to be able to operate on 1 engine as well if there is a failure. One has to wonder if this was a bird strike incident on both engines that maybe having 4 engines would have allowed the plane to circle bac…

A multiple engine aircraft maintaining flight on a single engine is vastly different to the same craft being able to complete a take off when an engine fails mid process. Aircraft can land (in right circumstances) by gliding in sans power .. the same cannot be said for take offs.

If during your takeoff roll you lose one engine on a twin engine jet below speed V1[0], you reject the take-off. V1 is calculated for the aircraft such that above that speed you are able to safely take off and execute a go-around in order to land again on just that single engine.

Aborting above V1 is heavily discouraged because usually there's a strong risk of running off the end of the runway. Of course, if you lose both engines above V1, you're really in trouble and left without much choice.

But we don't know what happened with this flight so nothing I've said here should be taken as indicative of whatever went wrong in this case. It's purely information.

[0] Which depends on many factors including the type of aircraft, loading, weather conditions, state of the runway surface - for example, wet, or iced - etc., and needs to be calculated afresh for every take off.

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#85

Post by whycome »

ajross wrote: post #76
mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was just watching something the other day about how jet engines have gotten more efficient and powerful over the last 50 years where commercial airliners really only need 2 engines. All 2 engine aircraft also have to be able to operate on 1 engine as well if there is a failure. One has to wonder if this was a bird strike incident on both engines that maybe having 4 engines would have allowed the plane to circle bac…

I don't think there's ever been a double-bird-strike incident, though. And what dual engine failures I can think of are due to failure of a shared system (e.g. fuel exhaustion, c.f. Gimli Glider). [Edit: yeah, yeah, forgot the Tom Hanks movie, sue me. I do wish folks would respond to the much more important point below, which isn't invalidated by a single data point though.] Constructing solutions for multiple-mode f…

Hudson/Sully was dual engine bird strike no?

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#86

Post by fabian2k »

ajross wrote: post #76
mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was just watching something the other day about how jet engines have gotten more efficient and powerful over the last 50 years where commercial airliners really only need 2 engines. All 2 engine aircraft also have to be able to operate on 1 engine as well if there is a failure. One has to wonder if this was a bird strike incident on both engines that maybe having 4 engines would have allowed the plane to circle bac…

I don't think there's ever been a double-bird-strike incident, though. And what dual engine failures I can think of are due to failure of a shared system (e.g. fuel exhaustion, c.f. Gimli Glider). [Edit: yeah, yeah, forgot the Tom Hanks movie, sue me. I do wish folks would respond to the much more important point below, which isn't invalidated by a single data point though.] Constructing solutions for multiple-mode f…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549

There certainly have been bird strikes that disabled all engines.

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#87

Post by potato3732842 »

closewith wrote: post #70
glimshe wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he's implying that countries near the equator are underdeveloped and thus the crash could have been caused by human factors (such as negligence)

As opposed to the predictable accidents of the Amazon and Guyanan basins? Apart from the casual racism of lumping together areas of three continents in your generalisation, it was lazy racism as at 23 degrees North, Ahmedabad is close in latitude to Florida and far outside the 5-10 degree equitorial zone.

Latin America doesn't have as much high end aviation going on to fall out of the sky and the factions that are competing with the government for control in the new world are less inclined to slip explodey things onto flyey things than the ones in the old world.

I'm flattered you think I'm racist. I assure you I allocate my hate based on the contents of their mind than the color of their skin. I only have so much hate to go around and there's no reason to waste hate on people who don't need it.

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#89

Post by bravesoul2 »

Arch-TK wrote: post #56
greybox wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by "(and terrible practice)"?

An intersection takeoff is a takeoff where you do not use the full length of the runway. When you are a large aeroplane with a full load, reaching the necessary takeoff speeds required to rotate (pull up and begin lifting from the ground) can take longer than normal, at which point the climb speed will also be reduced if not properly compensated for (e.g. you miscalculate something and set the wrong elevator trim/tak…

Why is it a thing? Everything else in aviation seems to have good amounts of checks, balances and buffers. It feels the same to me as skimping a couple percent on fuel or doing less frequent maintenance. Both also reduce turnaround time.

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#90

Post by moralestapia »

infecto wrote: post #81
moralestapia wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

“Now you know why.” - why even respond like this? You took some general statistics not specific to the population of people who are whistleblowers and just matter of factly make it a truth. It’s about as ridiculous as saying the person is murdered without any proof which I guess aligns with your thought process. Being a whistleblower is ostracizing. Your colleagues and friends might no longer associate with you. It m…

>"Now you know why.” - why even respond like this?

Because you wrote "I don't know why".

>Being a whistleblower is ostracizing. [...]

Sure! That's already factored in the suicide statistic.

Post reply on HN