Live data from Hacker News

Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

viewfromthewing.com

201–210 of 372 posts

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#201
post #13

> strong kudos are due both to the air traffic controller who called off the Delta 737 and to the pilots of that plane who managed to abort their takeoff and stop the aircraft before it crossed runway 31L where the Boeing widebody passed in front of it Can't agree more

[flagged]

Is your comment self-referential?

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#202
post #29

This is an incredible write-up. Kudos to the journalist who wrote this piece. I wish more current events were chronicled this way.

@Dang / moderators: in case you are not already aware, in the sibling comment which is dead the username contains an inappropriate racial slur. Sorry I don't know how to better report this.

Edit: I figured it out, sorry for the noise. For anyone confused as me, you have to click the timestamp to see the `flag` link on the comment.

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. That's almost unheard of. There's a speed called "V1"; this is the last possible moment for a pilot to start aborting the takeoff. There's another speed called "Vr", which is when the pilot starts the rotation (lifting the nose off the ground) [1]. Vr is higher than V1. Past V1 its unsafe to abort, even if a tire blows or an engine fails. The only time it would be aborted would be if the pilot thinks the plane i…

We were all deplaned after, and they had to find everyone new flights. They wound up getting me a hotel nearby. So I guess it was unflyable? Easily my worst travel experience.

Was it a multi engine jet? Just wondering, because they should be able to climb out on one engine, but some other planes can’t.

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#204
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm that's interesting since by the time the front wheel comes off the ground, an airplane would normally be past V1 speed and they'd have to commit to the takeoff.

That’s generally true but the rule is that you never abort past V1 unless you have specific immediate reason to believe the aircraft cannot become and stay airborne. There aren’t a ton of reasons one might think that but a few come to mind like total engine failure or lack of elevator control or similar.

In that case wouldn't the plane be at such a speed and distance along the runway as to not be able to physically stop before the end?

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In aviation post-event reports penalizing humans has usually the least priority, unless they intentionally violated the rules. If they did so unintentionally, or because they made a mistake, usually the entire industry gets better trainings, and/or system to prevent such. I'm generalizing here a lot.

Indeed. Punishing people for making human mistakes causes them to hide them, feel ashamed, and not highlight issues that may affect others. Aviation has fostered (very specifically) an open culture of inquisition to errors: it's assumed that if one qualified pilot made a mistake, any qualified pilot could make the same mistake under the same circumstances. If anything, you're actively encouraged to report things that…

Interesting that programming went in the same direction. Blameless post-mortems etc.

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#207

I had a sort-of hobby of learning and listening to ATC at one point. Some of these guys were scary-unintelligible . I remember this Chinese ATC at some major airport saying as fast as he possibly could “clah de leh” which was supposed to be “Clear to land”. It’s amazing the system works as well as it does.

Having accent is not the same as being "unintelligible". Do you know how to say "Clear to land" in Chinese?

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#208
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I hate that they call this having a "near-collision" >They came close to having a collision What? >but there was nothing like any sort of collision Because "near"

No bad thing happened, except Delta cancelling its flight. The bad thing was prevented by quick action.

Delta itself has likely tens of thousands in consequential financial losses from this event, if not more. And lives were put at risk.

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#209

I had a sort-of hobby of learning and listening to ATC at one point. Some of these guys were scary-unintelligible . I remember this Chinese ATC at some major airport saying as fast as he possibly could “clah de leh” which was supposed to be “Clear to land”. It’s amazing the system works as well as it does.

Having accent is not the same as being "unintelligible". Do you know how to say "Clear to land" in Chinese?

The universal language of aviation isn’t Chinese.

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maximum breaking, is powerful stuff… Real red hot metal and tolerances engineering stuff. You have to be able to stop the airplane at it’s maximum take off weight at the maximum takeoff ground speed (got to account for tail winds) within the acceptable safety stopping distance on the runway, and they have to sit there after this without any help for several minutes to represent the time it can take to scramble ground…

s/breaks/brakes

Phone autocorrect ducking sucks at times. ;-)
Post reply on HN