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

Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 crashes at SFO

airliners.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 275 posts

Re: Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 crashes at SFO

#181

Post by rdl »

ohazi wrote: post #67
rdl wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

777-200LR is pretty new though (2006?)

The aircraft in question is a 777-200ER, which first flew in 1996. The variants are usually relatively minor updates, though. Even the 747, which first flew in 1969, has a variant that can be considered "new" (-8, first flew in 2005). It's usually the early variants that validate the design. Relative to other comparable aircraft, the 777 has a remarkably clean accident/incident record over an operational history span…

Ah -- I was copying from the airliners.net thread where someone initially said it was a 777-200LR. It is amazing just how safe the 777 seems to be. I wish they'd done the KC-777 plan for tankers instead of a KC-767.

Re: Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 crashes at SFO

#182

Post by lgeek »

agilebyte wrote: post #151
frozenport wrote: post #99

Is this a case for or against automatic airplane control?

Free flight was supposed to have happened already. But there are obstacles. As for ATCs if you do not make use of a skill frequently, you atrophy. When you are suddenly thrown in the middle of an emergency, you perform badly. We can't have "mall cops" watching computers doing air traffic control. People do not like automation that much either. Consider the fact that underground trains have drivers even though technic…

> Consider the fact that underground trains have drivers even though technically they are not needed.

The London DLR[0] has been automated since it was opened in '87. It travels on the surface too.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docklands_Light_Railway

Re: Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 crashes at SFO

#183

Post by agilebyte »

lgeek wrote: post #182
agilebyte wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free flight was supposed to have happened already. But there are obstacles. As for ATCs if you do not make use of a skill frequently, you atrophy. When you are suddenly thrown in the middle of an emergency, you perform badly. We can't have "mall cops" watching computers doing air traffic control. People do not like automation that much either. Consider the fact that underground trains have drivers even though technic…

> Consider the fact that underground trains have drivers even though technically they are not needed. The London DLR[0] has been automated since it was opened in '87. It travels on the surface too. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docklands_Light_Railway

Ah well done, is it possible that this is because the contract is to a private company?

Re: Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 crashes at SFO

#184

Post by justin66 »

sbierwagen wrote: post #155
justin66 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bottlenecks in their escape were the doorway and the crew's deployment of the inflatable slide. Rushing the door in a panic would have done nobody any good. In a situation like that, why wouldn't you grab your bag if it was readily accessible? It seems like healthy, rational behavior rather than a symptom of extreme confusion.

The bottlenecks in their escape were the doorway and the crew's deployment of the inflatable slide... why wouldn't you grab your bag if it was readily accessible? Wrong. In order to be certified airworthy, you have to be able to evacuate an airliner in 90 seconds, in the dark, with some of the emergency exits blocked. Here's an A380 doing it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TAkAcQOnQY Here's a 777: http://www.youtube…

Thanks. That is impressive.

The whole thing now makes me wonder if there was some very deliberate reason for their egress to be delayed. Something having to do with fire or the risk of fire? (I really have no idea)

Re: Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 crashes at SFO

#186

Post by austenallred »

austenallred wrote: post #105
robbiet480 wrote: post #2

(latest info at bottom of comment) ABC reports it was coming from Taipei, linked forum says Taipei. Video of aftermath. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dFtmSybpuw&feature=youtu.be . Redwood City FD responding. Unknown amount of passengers. SFO FD using foam on entire plane. FAA has now shut down operations at SFO due to "disabled plane" 3rd alarm called, "red" alarm called. Multiple reports that fuselage is in multi…

They're now saying 2 are dead, 61 injured EDIT: They = KTVU News

Now saying 60 people unaccounted for.

Re: Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 crashes at SFO

#187

Post by saraid216 »

jarfcl wrote: post #174
LaGrange wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My friend with flight anxiety actually got it from researching airplane safety. While they did learn about probabilities n'all, they also learned about way too many details, after which every single sound seems like the oscillating electron pump failure on Molvania flight 52317 where nobody survived the spontaneous atmosphere exit. It's not exactly rational, it's your silly brain suddenly deciding the specific probab…

I would recommend trying private airplane lessons (on a calm day) Being in control of an airplane helps a lot, and that feeling may transfer to commercial flights.

I suspect this is what makes people feel that a car is safer: they themselves are in control, and can believe that they'd miraculously dodge any crashes through skill and luck.

I don't know if that sense of control is transferable, though; paranoid backseat drivers are still a thing.

Re: Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 crashes at SFO

#188

Post by lesslaw »

foobarbazqux wrote: post #31
lesslaw wrote: post #8

Why is this HN relevant ?

If you think it's off-topic and you have flagging privileges, you can flag it.

I was actually curious, not whiny. I picked it up from the "new" stream before it was top story and before any details.

HN is whatever people up-vote it to be.

Re: Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 crashes at SFO

#189

Post by jevinskie »

jlgaddis wrote: post #111
ben1040 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously. If you are ever posed with a situation where you must evacuate an aircraft, then GTFO and just leave your bags onboard. Do not do anything that could impede others' egress. You can get new stuff later, and the airline is likely to compensate you anyway (case in point, within days after US Air 1549 landed in the Hudson, the airline cut checks to the passengers to compensate for irretrievable belongings). Yo…

We don't know (yet) what happened. It could be that the passengers were standing around for a minute or two before being able to exit the plane. In the meantime, you're probably not hurting anything by reaching up into the overhead or under your feet and grabbing your bag.

It can get caught in a seat while exiting. That already happens all the time in normal deplaning situations, let alone an emergency situation!
Post reply on HN