Live data from Hacker News

Enroute Airbus A380 wake flips Challenger business jet upside down

flightservicebureau.org

181–190 of 376 posts

Re: Enroute Airbus A380 wake flips Challenger business jet upside down

#181
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you recall Boyle's Law from high school physics - Temperature is proportional to pressure. Aircraft wings generate an intense area of low pressure over the top of the wing (which is what essentially generates the lift). This low pressure area is magnified when flaps and slats are deployed. On a humid day, the lowering of the pressure over the wings can basically force the air temperature at that point to lower and…

Wings generate lift primarily by deflecting air downward. There is an area of low pressure over the wing where air is taking a longer path than under the wing, but that is only responsible for a small fraction of the lift.

You should listen to Cabin Pressure, best radio series ever:

Explanation of why aeroplanes fly to airhost: https://youtu.be/AaE9j7u3XJA?t=642

From Captain to Airhost: https://youtu.be/AaE9j7u3XJA?t=1031

From First Officer to Airhost: https://youtu.be/AaE9j7u3XJA?t=1458

Re: Enroute Airbus A380 wake flips Challenger business jet upside down

#182
post #77
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wings generate lift primarily by deflecting air downward. There is an area of low pressure over the wing where air is taking a longer path than under the wing, but that is only responsible for a small fraction of the lift.

That's a meaningless correction, and technically not correct. Aircraft are lifted up by air molecules hitting the underside of the rigid body with more force than the top side, by definition. The net integrated instantaneous pressure at the surface of the aircraft IS the lift. The fact that air gets deflected downward is a necessary (c.f. conservation of momentum) effect too. So it's not incorrect to do the analysis…

Air does not behave like a bunch of bullets hitting a wing. It's a fluid with velocity and pressure everywhere, not simply in the vicinity of aircraft surfaces. A wing is a pump that sets up circulation in the airflow, upward of the leading edge and downward off the trailing edge. The downward momentum of the air flowing off the trailing edge produces an equal and opposite reaction by Newton's third law which is the lift.

This is clearly demonstrated by this incident. Many tons of air deflected downwards by the A380's wings had enough force to flip the unfortunate plane below several times.

Re: Enroute Airbus A380 wake flips Challenger business jet upside down

#183
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They saw the plane, and 1-2 minutes later... bang. We already went over this. We did, that's why it made zero sense that you said this was predicated on not being aware of the positions of other planes. They were aware of this a full 1-2 minutes earlier at least. They could've turned on the sign. The solution was totally implementable.

I think we've reached that point at which I'd be happy to buckle my seatbelt and let you walk around the cabin to your heart's content. I am not your parent.

Except if he lands on you, that isn't very funny

Re: Enroute Airbus A380 wake flips Challenger business jet upside down

#184
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear - any cyclist crazy enough to ride a bicycle on the same road as cars definitely needs all the protection they can get, I think that goes without saying. But now you've moved from the "extraordinary low risk of accident" that comes from cycling to the "Probably one of the most dangerous things I can do" risk factor. And, pretty much 100% of the time I go snowboarding, I wear a helmet. What I'm trying to s…

Huh? Over here at least, people (me included) cycle on the same road as cars all the time. Not freeways, of course, but normal city roads with a speed limit of up to 50 km/h. It's actually illegal to cycle on the sidewalk unless there's an explicit traffic sign allowing bicycles.

Netherlands doesn't count, it's a place where cars respect bikes and vice versa. Try riding a bicycle in a country where there's hostility between the two.

Re: Enroute Airbus A380 wake flips Challenger business jet upside down

#185
post #64
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I'm pretty sure that's the first rule that goes out the window when you're on a private jet.

There's a reason that people with money and power don't always experience good outcomes. Sure, you can do what you like on your jet, and therefore expose yourself to risk that most people never experience. Likewise skiing off-piste or a number of other equally silly activities that you can do, but absolutely shouldn't.

Quad biking around your estate comes to mind.

Re: Enroute Airbus A380 wake flips Challenger business jet upside down

#186
post #155

> It's an incredible feeling, > lots of fun > Yes, it can be dangerous, > but it's a risk you can > manage yourself Try meth!

This is hilarious. But for the sake of the internet, I just have to say, no, really, don't actually try meth.

Noted. Thanks.

Re: Enroute Airbus A380 wake flips Challenger business jet upside down

#187
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear - any cyclist crazy enough to ride a bicycle on the same road as cars definitely needs all the protection they can get, I think that goes without saying. But now you've moved from the "extraordinary low risk of accident" that comes from cycling to the "Probably one of the most dangerous things I can do" risk factor. And, pretty much 100% of the time I go snowboarding, I wear a helmet. What I'm trying to s…

Huh? Over here at least, people (me included) cycle on the same road as cars all the time. Not freeways, of course, but normal city roads with a speed limit of up to 50 km/h. It's actually illegal to cycle on the sidewalk unless there's an explicit traffic sign allowing bicycles.

You could not pay me to rid a bicycle on the road here in Singapore. Or in many places in Northern California. I can't tell you about Dubai, because I've never seen a cyclist on the road there. My "Risk Mitigation" strategy in these scenarios is to say, "No, Hell No."

Regarding the law - it's illegal in Redwood City to ride on the sidewalk, but almost 100% of "Utility" cyclists (that is, people taking short trips who aren't decked out in "cyclist" gear) almost always ride on the sidewalk; and the police certainly did not make it a priority to ticket them - and given the density of police cars in Redwood City, any given cyclist traveling a few kilometers was likely to be seen by one, if not more police officers.

Re: Enroute Airbus A380 wake flips Challenger business jet upside down

#188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using that philosophy, then anyone riding a bicycle, even if they aren't going at high-speed on road, should wear a helmet "just in case" there is an accident to protect their skull? There is a balance between annoyance and utility. I personally have no problem wearing a belt for the entire flight, including while sleeping. But I'm not to dismayed by those who leave it off, walk around the cabin, go hang out near the…

That happens to be the justification that my country uses to make bicycle helmets mandatory (though there's significant debate about whether it's actually helped reduce injury rates, and it fairly clearly depresses overall rates of cycling versus other modes of transport). I think the cost of wearing an aircraft seatbelt while you happen to be seated is rather lower than the cost of having to wear a bicycle helmet, t…

There's an argument that mandatory bicycle helmets are worse, not better for the overall health goals: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/aug/12/mandato...

Mandatory helmets protect cyclists from injury - but make cycling less popular. Fewer people cycling means they get less exercise and increase other health risks. On average it's a health benefit to cycle without a helmet, compared to driving - and of course people are still welcome to add helmets if they don't mind them.

Re: Enroute Airbus A380 wake flips Challenger business jet upside down

#189

> one thousand feet above Are the imperial units of measurement an aviation thing, or an American thing, or a bit of both?

In aviation, altitudes are in feet, distances in nautical miles, speed in knots (nautical miles per hour).

To be specific: horizontal distance is given in nm, vertical distance is given in feet.

Re: Enroute Airbus A380 wake flips Challenger business jet upside down

#190
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He wasted precious time indulging quackery.

Anecdotal but I notice in my circles only less financially well off people endulge in quackery. The latest is that you do not need treatment for anything if you do enough marijuana and reiki (not to mention a lot of poor people burn their last money on reiki training....) especially not doing chemo when they sbould is hard to witness.

I can't say I know anyone who's indulged reiki, but I've got a lot of flak from my brother telling me that cannabis cures cancer, when I told him that I was doing chemoradiotherapy for my Stage 3 rectal cancer. Today I've finished a cycle of six weeks of treatment, and while I'm extremely tired, the signs are good that it's in remission. If I'm lucky, I'll have a full pathological response, i.e., it's gone.

Despite the number of people who go through cancer, it's rarely brought up in polite conversation. It wasn't until I got it myself that all manner of people came out of the woodwork to talk about how someone they knew had gone through the same thing. Many of them have been using concentrated cannabis oil (which my brother also said I should do). After reading a couple of studies, it does have a positive effect on cancers, but the level depends on the type of cancer. In the case of colorectal cancers, it seems to stop the cancer but not kill it, most likely due to the CB1 receptors in the tumour being hypermethylated (as in, the gene isn't being expressed). The level of evidence isn't that of a systematic review, but it's enough for me to give it a go and certainly enough for further research. Unfortunately, the two sides of the argument seem to think that it either doesn't do anything (there's not enough evidence) or that the medical establishment is just a ruse and that cannabis cures all cancer. I prefer to use my critical thinking skills and get the best of both worlds.

I can understand why people might indulge in quackery - I've got surgeons telling me they need to cut out my rectum and part of my lower intestine, even with a full pathological response. Possible side effects are shitting 3 times a day (not so bad) and erectile dysfunction (worse). This has been the gold standard of care for 15+ years now, and the surgeons don't give a fuck about my quality of life, they just want to cut. There's mounting evidence to show this might be overtreating the problem, and that you can get away with a heavier dose of chemo with the radiotherapy. Frankly, I don't want anyone cutting anything out of me unless it's absolutely necessary, but it's hard finding an advocate who would be willing to tell the surgeons to fuck off.

I'm lucky, in this sense: I understand the research and I have access to upcoming studies (I used to work at an institute that did systematic reviews of evidence). Most people won't have such advantages, so they just sit there and do what the surgeons tell them to do, as if they don't have any options other than no treatment. If that's all the choice I got, I'd be wary of the medical establishment too.

Post reply on HN