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

141–150 of 633 posts

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

#141

Post by Simon_O_Rourke »

ihuk wrote: post #31
Simon_O_Rourke wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dual engine failure with a stall right at the end as it's going in. Guessing it's either a foreign object ingested into both engines, probably a bird strike, or fuel starvation.

Here's a Reddit video: https://www.reddit.com/r/ahmedabad/comments/1l9i1ga/om_shant... And here's a YouTube video showing a Ram Air Turbine (RAT) being deployed on a 787 for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFBCGf50Trc&t=69s

I'm assuming the Ram Air Turbine gives extra evidence of a dual engine failure (or at least the engine that generated power). Engine spools down, power is lost, air turbine needs to be deployed.

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

#142

Post by chromehearts »

DanielleMolloy wrote: post #107

There is a person on X who says he has left the plane before takeoff and has uploaded videos of non-functional entertainment panels: https://x.com/akku92/status/1933114664923148455

No correlation between non-functional displays on passenger seats & possible engine failures etc.

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

#143

Post by aipatselarom »

mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #137
aipatselarom wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The guy's just asking if four engines instead of two would have made a difference? It's curiosity, it's learning, it's looking for an explanation. That's exactly the kind of comment that deserves to be here. >[...] who doesn't have any relevant expertise, Is that a requirement to comment on this thread? Do you fulfill that requirement you brought in?

That is entirely where I'm coming from - plane designs from the past had longer wingspans and supported 4 engines. Engines have gotten more efficient and powerful so cross-ocean routes don't need 4 engines anymore. So I was wondering what if current plane designs had 4 smaller but equally as efficient engines instead of 2. The vast majority of airplane accidents happen at takeoff or landings, if some of those can be…

>taking some actual flying lessons

Unironically, you're probably way more qualified than most of the people here throwing rubbish at you.

A classic on places like this.

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

#144

Post by klausa »

aipatselarom wrote: post #139
klausa wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the topic of dudes online speculating wildly? Yes, I've been on this website quite a long time, unfortunately.

>On the topic of dudes online speculating wildly? Is that the topic of this thread?

Yes.

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

#146

Post by ikekkdcjkfke »

SecretDreams wrote: post #110
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #25

Gentle tip from a lifelong aviation enthusiast: wait one week before reading on causation. Exposing yourself to first-week speculation isn’t just unproductive, it’s often counterproductive since the actual findings can rhyme with the false speculation closely enough that you wind up muddling the two in your mind.

There's footage after takeoff of it descending with the air ram deployed, no engine power, gears down, and flaps up. TBD on the cause, but loss of engines for some reason seems to be the case. I do agree that a lot of info comes out first week that isn't all right. I'm just reciting what's been shown in videos.

Well, loss of engine power and gliding to a stop is not that a far fetched case. Why is there not a fuel dump button to prevent a whole trips worth of fuel going up in flames?

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

#147

Post by FridayoLeary »

Waterluvian wrote: post #103
Ichthypresbyter wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would a flock of birds large enough to be ingested by both engines of a two-engined plane not also be large enough to be ingested by all four engines of a four-engined plane?

Good point. We should be discussing eight-engine planes.

Like the b 52 bomber. I always liked them. We could convert them for passenger flights. Airlines could develop luggage pods that hang from the wings and the planes support mid air refuelling so that could help with turnarounds. They also have tail guns for even more safety. Also huge bay doors which will make getting on and off the plane much faster.

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

#148

Post by apples_oranges »

bartread wrote: post #73
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #25

Gentle tip from a lifelong aviation enthusiast: wait one week before reading on causation. Exposing yourself to first-week speculation isn’t just unproductive, it’s often counterproductive since the actual findings can rhyme with the false speculation closely enough that you wind up muddling the two in your mind.

Yeah, I think I might wait for the MentourPilot take on this one. I can't see any benefit in speculating. Horrifying that it came down in a residential area with almost all its fuel still on board though. The aftermath is beyond belief.

I know it's not his fault, hate the player not the game, but he will make what off this crash (and his analysis ofc)? $10k?

I remember long ago he said he would not report on crashes but that's what people want so no blame..

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

#149

Post by Arch-TK »

consumer451 wrote: post #129
Arch-TK wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The engines power the hydraulic actuators in an aircraft an aircraft of that size cannot be trivially controlled without that hydraulic system. The APU should have been started to provide backup power in the case of engine failure but during take-off there is already very little time to do anything and it's possible that the sudden workload overloaded both the pilot and copilot or some other human factors were involv…

You can hear what sounds a lot like the very distinct sound of the RAT having been deployed in one of the videos. There is also no main turbine sound. This really seems like dual engine failure, for whatever reason. https://old.reddit.com/r/ahmedabad/comments/1l9i1ga/om_shant... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ram_air_turbine

I saw you mentioning this but the RAT on the 787 sticks out of the bottom and should have been visible at around :04 seconds into that video when the aircraft silhouette is visible clearly against the background.

Although it's possible I am just missing from the video. You are right that the sound is quite distinct and can be clearly heard in the video.

Post reply on HN