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

‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

fallows.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 402 posts

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#321

Post by titusjohnson »

ak217 wrote: post #307
SQueeeeeL wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how many people know this, but one of the first instances of "union busting" ever committed by the US federal govt was against air traffic controllers. The job used to be extremely competitive and prestigious, but overall lower wages and security has made it way harder to attract as many highly talented individuals. And with how many rules there are in that pdf, it's shocking we don't see multiple accide…

Air traffic controllers do have a union. PATCO, the previous union that was "busted", was a public employee union that chose to hold critical public infrastructure hostage, which is unacceptable. Any union that does that should expect to be stripped of its monopoly on that kind of labor.

No, they did not. Reagan very much wanted to spread that lie, but no infrastructure was held hostage. The laborers who held the skills needed to run that infrastructure declined to work when their compensation negotiations were declined.

Reagan's actions have had a profoundly disturbing effect on the American middle class that is still being felt today.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#322

Post by metabagel »

barelyauser wrote: post #245
mcv wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a money problem to me. Less time between planes means more planes means more money. It sounds to me like far too many critical safety decisions are being made with an eye on money rather than safety. There were reports warning that Fukushima wasn't safe in case of a tsunami, but the company in charge of the plant decided to ignore that. Deep Water was caused by cost cuts. The Boeing 737 Max was made for f…

Risk will always exist. Our most precious resource is time. Every effort to save it is worth it. What if it causes one accident every 20 years? It saved thousands of years of human time in the meantime.

You’ll likely still have to spend that time after the horrific accident.

Also, I would disagree that engineering time is more valuable than human life. Engineering time should be spent on safeguarding human life. Otherwise, what are we even doing?

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#323

Post by [deleted] »

metabagel wrote: post #322
barelyauser wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Risk will always exist. Our most precious resource is time. Every effort to save it is worth it. What if it causes one accident every 20 years? It saved thousands of years of human time in the meantime.

You’ll likely still have to spend that time after the horrific accident. Also, I would disagree that engineering time is more valuable than human life. Engineering time should be spent on safeguarding human life. Otherwise, what are we even doing?

[deleted]

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#324

Post by [deleted] »

rationalist wrote: post #271
zackbloom wrote: post #123

Just to give a little context as a pilot: It is the job of the tower controller to decide who uses the runway when. There are often multiple planes waiting to take off, and multiple planes nearing the airport to land. It's not uncommon for a tower controller to allow a plane to takeoff while another is approaching the runway. The theory is, of course, that the flight will depart in plenty of time. In this case, the c…

> I feel for these tower controllers I would feel for this tower controller if there wasn't a bunch of comments in r/ATC saying how this particular controller has transferred between facilities because he keeps messing up and makes workplace complaints instead of owning up to his mistakes. Edit to add source: > a controller who, according to everyone who has worked with him from the last facility where he washed out…

[deleted]

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#325

Post by metabagel »

JackFr wrote: post #302
SQueeeeeL wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how many people know this, but one of the first instances of "union busting" ever committed by the US federal govt was against air traffic controllers. The job used to be extremely competitive and prestigious, but overall lower wages and security has made it way harder to attract as many highly talented individuals. And with how many rules there are in that pdf, it's shocking we don't see multiple accide…

Police unions improve the lives of police officers but do little to improve policing. Teachers' unions improve the lives of teachers but have little effect on student outcomes. It's not obvious to me that a powerful air traffic controllers' union would do anything to improve safety. In fact if other public sector unions are informative, the result of a strong ATC union would be to protect and insulate poor performers…

The workers were asking for better working conditions and equipment. Both of those impact their ability to do their job.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#326

Post by phpisthebest »

thfuran wrote: post #318
phpisthebest wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>tested daily for the very reason you mention Which also limits the hiring pool as many people, myself included, would refuse to be tested daily on principle. Hell I object to pre-employment screenings. And I have not drunk a drop of Alcohol in over 25 years, nor done any drugs, dont smoke, nothing. That said I am not taking your little test to prove that to you unless you have a reasonable articulable reason to sus…

Then you shouldn't be involved in safety-critical areas. That's just entirely the wrong outlook. You should never skip an important verification step because someone promises things are fine.

yes, Freedom, Personal autonomy, Privacy, and Innocence until proven guilty are all the "entirely the wrong outlook " and people holding that "wrong outlook" clearly can not be anywhere near "safety-critical areas"

that is just absurd, Safety Theater is basically what you are advocating for

Let me ask you this, do you think forcing me to remove my shoes is a "critical safety" process before boarding a plan, and that allowing someone to pay $100 to bypass that means it is secure?

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#327

Post by ErikVandeWater »

mcv wrote: post #223
0xFF0123 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be curious to know how much it actually improves throughput. It seems strange to use optimistic locks in such a safety critical process, when a more fail-safe approach is available.

Sounds like a money problem to me. Less time between planes means more planes means more money. It sounds to me like far too many critical safety decisions are being made with an eye on money rather than safety. There were reports warning that Fukushima wasn't safe in case of a tsunami, but the company in charge of the plant decided to ignore that. Deep Water was caused by cost cuts. The Boeing 737 Max was made for f…

People tend to complain about the safety of airplane even though it is in the top echelon of safe modes of transit. There's no reason to try to reach the highest-hanging fruit trying to make it even safer when people are dying in droves on the road just getting to the airport. Much better to do something about that low-hanging fruit.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#328

Post by metabagel »

JackFr wrote: post #305
CydeWeys wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How convenient to make strikes illegal. That disarms the union of one of its most potent weapons in ensuring its members get their due.

There is a fundamental difference between private and public sector unions. "All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt (the guy who created the NLRB and was responsible for modern labor…

As the head of the government, he had a great interest in not having unions in government service.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#329

Post by ErikVandeWater »

gus_massa wrote: post #275
barelyauser wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Risk will always exist. Our most precious resource is time. Every effort to save it is worth it. What if it causes one accident every 20 years? It saved thousands of years of human time in the meantime.

If time is our most precious resource, then build more runways. The problem is that they cost more money to build and more money to operate. So we go back to >> It sounds to me like far too many critical safety decisions are being made with an eye on money rather than safety.

It takes people's time to build runways. That's time they won't be building other valuable things.

You're ignoring the core truth of the comment you're replying to: Scarcity exists. There is no way to have it all; there are only compromises. Simply walking is dangerous because you could fall. We could all go back to being infants* crawling on the floor if we wanted to be safer. But we won't. Making more compromises in the name of safety has to be justified. Planes will never be perfectly safe. That is okay.

Re: ‘Confirming we are cleared to land?’ Who said what at Austin

#330

Post by idiotsecant »

ErikVandeWater wrote: post #327
mcv wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a money problem to me. Less time between planes means more planes means more money. It sounds to me like far too many critical safety decisions are being made with an eye on money rather than safety. There were reports warning that Fukushima wasn't safe in case of a tsunami, but the company in charge of the plant decided to ignore that. Deep Water was caused by cost cuts. The Boeing 737 Max was made for f…

People tend to complain about the safety of airplane even though it is in the top echelon of safe modes of transit. There's no reason to try to reach the highest-hanging fruit trying to make it even safer when people are dying in droves on the road just getting to the airport. Much better to do something about that low-hanging fruit.

This doesn't make much sense, IMO. Road safety and air travel safety are orthogonal tasks. We can and should do both things.
Post reply on HN