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

Masks, Smoke, and Mirrors: The story of EgyptAir flight 804

admiralcloudberg.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 142 posts

Re: Masks, Smoke, and Mirrors: The story of EgyptAir flight 804

#111

Post by mlinhares »

brnt wrote: post #58
ngneer wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make a valid point. I stand corrected. "Hacks" is not an accurate term, and fails to account for the full circumstance. I was merely appalled at how willing EAAID were to jump to conclusions and twist facts towards a convenient narrative. France is a democracy, and that makes for an unfair comparison between the two agencies. I am sure that even the most intellectually honest individual will choose their own safe…

Such are the mechanics of fascist dictatorships. Individuals are in no way empowered to think or act in ways not supporting the Great Leader. You being unsafe is the method of control. Take care, America.

Please don't put the blame on dictatorships alone, democratic countries do the same all the time. There's multiple cities in the US where the city officials hid the fact their water was contaminated.

Re: Masks, Smoke, and Mirrors: The story of EgyptAir flight 804

#112

Post by wussboy »

eadmund wrote: post #94

> there was no evidence that the pilots of flight 804 smoked during the flight. But even though the BEA found that a cigarette didn’t cause the fire on flight 804 … the BEA recommended that EASA examine these risks and amend regulations as necessary Smoking had nothing to do with this incident. Their own testing showed that holding a cigarette in the oxygen stream was (surprisingly) not dangerous. The only risk from…

This is the second pro smoking post I’ve seen of yours on this thread. A curious stance to take.

Could a cigarette fall into the mask stowage box and rest against the oxygen tube thus creating a fire? Yes, it could. The entire and complete elimination of this risk is simply solved by forbidding the pilots from smoking, which is already forbidden to the entire cabin crew and passengers. What’s the big deal? Who is harmed by not allowing pilots to smoke?

Re: Masks, Smoke, and Mirrors: The story of EgyptAir flight 804

#113

Post by qingcharles »

eadmund wrote: post #95
qingcharles wrote: post #72

This is wild to me: "Even though passengers have been forbidden from smoking on airplanes for 25 years, the rules about smoking in the cockpit are less straightforward, and international regulations appear to invest the captain with the authority to decide whether smoking will be allowed or not."

Why is it surprising? There’s no danger from smoking on-board; banning it was never about safety.

Smoking on flights sucked. The whole cabin ended up hazy and choked with smoke. It stank. I hated those little ashtrays full of nasty ash and gum in the armrests. There are more than just the obvious safety reasons to ban it.

Re: Masks, Smoke, and Mirrors: The story of EgyptAir flight 804

#114

Post by robocat »

stall84 wrote: post #76

This had all the tone from the outset to just be narrowly focussed on this crash-investigation alone, but the writer did dedicate a paragraph to Egyptair Flight 990 from 1999.. An incident that really was one of the first modern airline pilot-suicide's that has never (The NTSB's conclusion) been agreed upon by Egypt. And in the past couple of decades that number has risen at an alarming pace (LAM Mozambique Flight 47…

Suicide is more common than we measure and can be impetuous:

  Three days after a publicized suicide, automobile fatalities increase by 31%. The more the suicide is publicized, the more the automobile fatalies increase. The age of the drivers is significantly correlated with the age of the person described in the suicide story. Single-car accidents increase more than other types just after the publicized suicide.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2778220

Re: Masks, Smoke, and Mirrors: The story of EgyptAir flight 804

#115

Post by ddalex »

soapboxrocket wrote: post #5

Reminds me a bit of the UPS Flight 6 that crashed in 2010. Wasn't the cause of the fire, but the fire heated up the co-pilots oxygen system to the point he couldn't wear it and eventually succumbed to smoke hypoxia. Due to smoke in the cabin the pilot couldn't see his flight deck readouts or out the window and eventually crashed into the ground.

One would have to wonder why an emergency smoke extractor fan isn't default equipment - when pilots oxy is deployed a panel should blow outward and a high flow fan start.

Re: Masks, Smoke, and Mirrors: The story of EgyptAir flight 804

#116

Post by unyttigfjelltol »

ec109685 wrote: post #107
ordu wrote: post #67

> if it was a coverup, then the EAAID gave away its own game by attaching the BEA’s comprehensive findings. I'd say, that EAAID had written the report in a way to make the coveraup unmistakable. I mean, the reasoning is not just bad, it contradicts to itself in a way, that to my mind one couldn't achieve without a deliberation. So it is possible that EAAID was forced to support the hypothesis but resisted it in the o…

Besides not agreeing with the EAAID, nothing in then BEA report makes Egypt look bad. It was a tragic accident and the crew acted admirably. What was the motivation for Egypt to insist on a bomb detonation beyond them believing that is what happened?

I assumed the lavatory alarm sent the Egyptian commission irretrievably down the wrong investigatory path, and couldn't be pulled back.

That said, answering your question, an alternative interpretation would read quite a lot of missing context from the pilot's final words on the CVR:

> For several seconds, the weak sound of breathing continued, followed by the thud of an object falling to the floor. And then, uttering the last words of flight 804, words heard by no one save for that lonely sentinel, the CVR, he said, “[I] ask forgiveness from God.”

Re: Masks, Smoke, and Mirrors: The story of EgyptAir flight 804

#117

Post by elashri »

unyttigfjelltol wrote: post #116
ec109685 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Besides not agreeing with the EAAID, nothing in then BEA report makes Egypt look bad. It was a tragic accident and the crew acted admirably. What was the motivation for Egypt to insist on a bomb detonation beyond them believing that is what happened?

I assumed the lavatory alarm sent the Egyptian commission irretrievably down the wrong investigatory path, and couldn't be pulled back. That said, answering your question, an alternative interpretation would read quite a lot of missing context from the pilot's final words on the CVR: > For several seconds, the weak sound of breathing continued, followed by the thud of an object falling to the floor. And then, utterin…

> “[I] ask forgiveness from God.”

That's too much reading by a western observer who doesn't understand the religious and cultural aspect of things. This could mean anything from "hoping that God will help us in this difficult situation by admitting your sins" to someone who realizes it is almost the end and as someone who believes in after death then they want to ask forgiveness in the last moments.

Re: Masks, Smoke, and Mirrors: The story of EgyptAir flight 804

#118

Post by varelse »

qingcharles wrote: post #113
eadmund wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it surprising? There’s no danger from smoking on-board; banning it was never about safety.

Smoking on flights sucked. The whole cabin ended up hazy and choked with smoke. It stank. I hated those little ashtrays full of nasty ash and gum in the armrests. There are more than just the obvious safety reasons to ban it.

[dead]

Re: Masks, Smoke, and Mirrors: The story of EgyptAir flight 804

#119

Post by CamperBob2 »

wat10000 wrote: post #110
FridayoLeary wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised that a catastrophic runaway oxygen leak is possible on an aircraft in todays day and age. Aircraft design is dominated by strict safety regimes that take into account even far fetched scenarios. Putting one valve in the rubber hose sounds sub optimal. Gas station pumps, for example have a valve that closes if the hose gets torn away. (which does happen when people forget about the pump and drive off). F…

The article says that a risk analysis was done for the system and the risk was found to be “extremely improbable,” meaning between 1 in 100 million to 1 in a billion flight hours. This flight may have been extremely unlucky, or the risk analysis may have been wrong. This is why the behavior of the Egyptian authorities is so frustrating; the purpose of the accident investigation is to see if there are problems that sh…

Also, even if the risk analysis was right, it didn't justify an "extremely improbable" conclusion. If the global airline industry operates a total of about 50 million flights per year, and the average duration is about 2 hours, then we stand a good chance of seeing an accident like this every few years.

Re: Masks, Smoke, and Mirrors: The story of EgyptAir flight 804

#120

Post by buildsjets »

dmckeon wrote: post #6

Tragedy from a Swiss cheese failure - several small holes/failures all line up. The issue of halon extinguishers versus oxygen-powered combustion producing many toxins while failing to extinguish is interesting - good that: > Halon fire extinguishers are scheduled to be phased out of most commercial aircraft by the end of 2025.

No, they are not. Source: me. Also here’s the applicable EU regulation. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A... Only handheld portable extinguishers are required to be phased out in 2025, and only in locations that are regulated by EASA. The FAA does not give a rip, and neither to the many regulatory bodies around he world who defer tho the FAA. I don’t know what the CAAC is doing. As far as the FAA concerned, compliance with the Montreal Treaty is the Department of State’s problem. Btw, since there is only one company that has certified a non-halon (2-BTP) handheld, they have jacked the retail/list price up to $2630 compared to an equivalent sized Halon 1211 handheld for $475.

Did you know that in the wrong circumstance a 2-BTP extinguisher will feed a fire rather than extinguish it? It’s a phenomenon called subinerting. One manufacturer blew up an FAA lab pretty badly while testing 2-BTP. Here’s a report on the earth-shattering kaboom. I only got to see he wreckage a few weeks later. https://www.nist.gov/publications/chemical-kinetic-mechanism...

Permanently installed Halon firex systems in commercial aircraft will not be phased out until 2040. I have been working, as a part of larger team, to certify a non-halon based firex in cargo and engine compartments for many many years now. It's been slow going. All commercial aircraft from all manufacturers still use Halon for their permanently installed firex and will continue to do so for the near future. We have put non-halon systems into some military aircraft that go thru a commercial certification, for example the KC46 tanker, but there are some good reasons it would not be the best choice for an actual commercial aircraft. https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/740629/kc-46...

If anyone actually gave a rip about ozone depletion, they would ground the F-16 fighter. The F-16 inerts it’s fuel tank ullage space with Halon. Every F-16 flight is a direct injection of pure Halon straight into the stratosphere. Mainline that stuff, feels so good. https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.1981-1638

Post reply on HN