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

Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 750 posts

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#181

Post by sepositus »

karlgkk wrote: post #90
sepositus wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so poor regulation could possibly be implicated Can you work out the logical connection for someone who wouldn't understand it?

There is incredible amounts of regulation around plane, maintenance. From specification of parts, to maintenance schedules, even all the way down to purity and composition of the materials. This regulation is used to make sure that all airlines that operate in the US adhere to the strict and narrow requirements from the manufacturers and the safety testing done. Whether or not you or other people ideologically agree…

Thanks. This seems like any change would take months, if not years, to play out. That's why I wasn't quite following the logic of _recent_ cuts having such an immediate impact.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#182

Post by listenallyall »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #137
fallingknife wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I'm not quite convinced of is that it is the regulation that keeps the airlines following the manufacturers' specifications. I see what happens to stock prices when these companies screw up and they lose a lot more money to that than they ever to do fines from regulators. Are the regulations actually doing much here or are they just repeating what the airlines would do anyway because they have a massive incentiv…

I would think the whole Boeing saga would disabuse you of that notion. Boeing put the bean counters in charge because it made their stock price go up . Of course, it goes up until the corners you cut to juice short term profitability cause something catastrophic to happen, like the multiple 787-max crashes, the door plug blowout, etc. By the time the bad stuff happens, the original decision makers are usually drinkin…

This kind of snark in the comments is always a bit weird. His pension alone is worth upwards of $40 or $50 million, plus he got paid over $20 million in 2013 and 14. He isn't particularly famous or well-known. Do you think his book royalties are even one percent of his net worth?

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#183

Post by kortilla »

lukev wrote: post #18

[flagged]

> so poor regulation could possibly be implicated.

This has to be one of the dumbest takes out there. Try to work out what could have been cut on the US regulation side that would have caused a crash in Canada such a short time later.

Do you think maybe delta just stopped following the law and let some children fly the plane? Or maybe decided to stop doing maintenance?

Seriously, what is the model here that makes any sense at all?

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#184

Post by DC-3 »

WalterBright wrote: post #141
MichaelZuo wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know there aren’t any? It seems a lot more likely the security managers aren’t in a hurry to release them to the public.

> How do you know there aren’t any? Have you ever seen one?

Sure, the Aeroflot Sukhoi crash a few years back.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgWSwbXMehI

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#185

Post by aqueueaqueue »

WalterBright wrote: post #118

I've not seen any video of the crash. Usually, when there's a crash, dash cam or other amatuer video caught it. Which leads to my repeated bafflement as to why there are no video cameras constantly pointed at flight ops at the airport. If every 7-11 can have a security cam recording hi-def 24/7, why can't a couple of these be mounted in the tower pointed at the tarmac?

This is decent.

https://x.com/Tr19192/status/1891579967042908439/mediaViewer...

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#186

Post by kortilla »

karlgkk wrote: post #90
sepositus wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so poor regulation could possibly be implicated Can you work out the logical connection for someone who wouldn't understand it?

There is incredible amounts of regulation around plane, maintenance. From specification of parts, to maintenance schedules, even all the way down to purity and composition of the materials. This regulation is used to make sure that all airlines that operate in the US adhere to the strict and narrow requirements from the manufacturers and the safety testing done. Whether or not you or other people ideologically agree…

None of that maintenance regulation went away with the cuts and even if airlines started to cut corners on maintenance under the assumption they could get away with it, it’s not going to show up 2 days later.

Implicating the recent cuts for this crash makes absolutely no sense.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#187

Post by listenallyall »

matthest wrote: post #64
marcusb wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I’m only 1/4 libertarian. I don’t think competition is enough. The risk of harm needs to be balanced as well. With airplanes, you have not only the risk to paying customers, but to bystanders who in many cases cannot be made whole in the event of an accident (i.e., you might get a financial settlement if an airplane crashes into your house, but that won’t bring your family members who were in the house back t…

I'm pro airline regulation given the current state of the market. But you could also argue the airline industry is fairly concentrated. There are only so many airlines. If a Delta flight crashes, you might still fly Delta again in the future, because there are only so many options. Now imagine if there were as many airlines as restaurants. If one Delta flight messes up in any way, people would never fly them again. T…

> Now imagine if there were as many airlines as restaurants. If one Delta flight messes up in any way, people would never fly them again

Analogies like these usually deviate from actual reality. Numerous restaurants have had E.Coli outbreaks, sometimes fatal. And yet they remain in business. Thriving, even. Memories are short and people generally believe bad things only happen to other people.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#189

Post by dmix »

lmm wrote: post #124
signatoremo wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is full of clickbait messages like this. US and Canada can use a lot more trains, but air transport is more suitable for medium to long distance, such as this Minneapolis-Toronto route. They are complementary. The accident occurred on the ground, any aircraft is susceptible, “more trains” doesn’t make it less so.

> air transport is more suitable for medium to long distance, such as this Minneapolis-Toronto route. Eh maybe. That's not much longer than Beijing-Shanghai. Rail can definitely be competitive. > The accident occurred on the ground Plane crashes generally do. Given that all plane journeys involve at least one takeoff and landing, it's fair to consider collisions and incidents during those as part of a safety comparis…

> Eh maybe. That's not much longer than Beijing-Shanghai. Rail can definitely be competitive.

Connecting two growing mega cities by rail in a country that can still build things vs two mid-tier cities in two different countries, neither of which build anything without a decade of delays and 3x the budget (before the projects get cancelled), is not a good analogy to use against flight IMO.

Post reply on HN