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

UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

avherald.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 469 posts

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#341

Post by mywittyname »

Retric wrote: post #194
gwbas1c wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The common solution in many land strapped cities is for airports to rout aircraft over water. That works in costal areas, but not inland. There's no large body of water near the Louisville airport.

The Ohio River is a large body of water fairly close if someone was going to relocate Louisville airport.

I don't think effectively damming (alternatively, rerouting) the Ohio River is a solution to relocating an airport in Louisville. That's a wildly ambitious undertaking compared to most other land reclamation projects.

Yeah, the terrain around Louisville poses a challenge for placing an airport, but they could do like Cincinnati does, and have their airport located across the river. Or place it between Frankfurt and Louisville. Or do like Pittsburg and make the terrain flat enough for an international airport.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#342

Post by johann8384 »

octaane wrote: post #27

This is probably the worst way a plane could go down in terms of damage caused. Maximum effect in term of damage. Cargo plane apparently reached V1 (go/no go speed) on the runway, and suffered a catastrophic engine failure. They passed V1, so they knew they were going down. Engine was shedding large debris, including the housing (!!!) which is a shrapnel shield. They were on fire just as they reached V1. Plane was fu…

Not a UPS Factory (whatever that means).

Grade A Auto Parts on Melton Ave was the initial damaged building. I don't have the name of the chemical place handy.

Med Command setup at River City Metals.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#343

Post by [deleted] »

SamuelAdams wrote: post #336

It does make me wonder: why are aircraft takeoffs and landings not recorded more often, with higher quality cameras and more angles? If I can watch an NFL replay in 4k a few seconds after the ball is snapped, why not record (and overwrite) all flights that take off and land at every airport? Like a dash cam, they can save the footage only if there is a problem. Surely that would be much better than splicing together…

[deleted]

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#344

Post by johann8384 »

kube-system wrote: post #191
basisword wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> highway and warehouses at the end of the runway It's astonishing that this is a thing. Why aren't we building airports with enough space for a plane to remain on the ground and have plenty of room to decelerate in this situation? I can understand why it can't be retro fitted to existing airports but is it a scenario that's considered at new airports? Just seems like such an absolutely basic safety step.

Louisville is a major cargo hub. The airport likely was not built by the warehouses, the warehouses were likely built by the airport.

Yes, in fact, lots of the area that is warehouses to the south, and where the larger run way to the east and some buffer zone to the east used to be neighborhoods and they were bought and torn down to make room around the airport.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Louisville/comments/1983ko2/what_ha...

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#345

Post by mh- »

renewiltord wrote: post #271
chaostheory wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is likely relevant https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/11/airplane-maintenance... TDLR 10-20 years ago, the US started allowing maintenance of domestic planes in foreign countries, outside the reach of the FAA’s inspections

I wonder what the FAA does organizationally that lets it function properly to find cause. It must be highly tempting to blame things on the foreigners and stuff like that. The Air India crash had a lot of that going on. The 737 Max crashes were also so frequently explained by online commenters as because of “outsourced software engineers” and so on. But the FAA/NTSB always comes through with fact finding despite the…

The NTSB is completely independent from the FAA, by design.

The history of how that came to be is worth a read and answers your question better than I could.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Transportation_Safety...

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#346

Post by fortran77 »

Moto7451 wrote: post #201
JCM9 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zoning guidance generally prohibits land use near an airport that has a high density of people, precisely to limit casualties during an event like this. Industrial would be permitted while residential and commercial use is not. Scarily there are communities that have ignored such logic and permitted dense residential development right next to an airport.

Jets are also simply too loud for homes under the takeoff path in standard use. There’s what amounts to a ghost town next to LAX due to this and the history of the airport. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palisades_del_Rey,_California Burbank Airport has quiet hours and has left a bunch of commercially zoned area under that takeoff path. I’m in Atlanta now and they bought up a lot of land around the airport when redeve…

I grew up 3 miles (as the crow flies) from JFK Runway 31 R / 13 L in Cedarhurst, New York

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Cedarhurst,+NY+11516/John+F....

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#347

Post by lesuorac »

SamuelAdams wrote: post #336

It does make me wonder: why are aircraft takeoffs and landings not recorded more often, with higher quality cameras and more angles? If I can watch an NFL replay in 4k a few seconds after the ball is snapped, why not record (and overwrite) all flights that take off and land at every airport? Like a dash cam, they can save the footage only if there is a problem. Surely that would be much better than splicing together…

Have you seen dash cam footage?

High quality cameras are actually really rare and expensive.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#348

Post by inglor_cz »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #288
rkomorn wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> IMHO, this is a perfect example why the government needs to regulate prices in safety-critical industries. The "race to the bottom" must be prevented - sorry, flying NYC-SFO for 70$, that's not sustainable. Are you saying higher prices would lead to better safety? If so, I think it's optimistic to assume that would be the result, rather than just more profits. I'm all for tighter regulations and enforcement on safe…

Super-low prices require razor-thin margins, which leads to cutting corners, which leads to worse safety.

IDK, Ryanair in Europe (an epitome of low-cost airline) has both decent margins and zero crashes. They once had a birdstrike, hardly caused by their ticket cost, and wrote off the hull (no fatalities); otherwise, nothing.

A lot depends on your overall marketing. The airline can make money on a "stupid tax", e.g. people who didn't check twice the max. allowed weight of their baggage and have to pay a 100 USD/EUR fee for that single extra pound. I have seen it more than once.

People being people, you can almost rely on this happening frequently enough.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#349

Post by rogerrogerr »

JCharante wrote: post #319
rogerrogerr wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Occasional” implies a rate at least several orders of magnitude higher than actual.

if it happens once a decade occasional sounds right

So far this year alone, there have been 31,000,000 flights. https://www.airportia.com/flights-monitor/. So somewhere around 300,000,000 flights per decade.

If someone said an event happens “occasionally”, I would expect it to be significantly more frequent than 1/300,000,000.

Powerball lottery odds are 1 in 292 million. I wouldn’t say that I “occasionally” win the lottery when I buy a ticket!

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#350

Post by silisili »

JCM9 wrote: post #108
justsid wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The damage on the ground is scary to look at. I think the only silver lining here is that it was "just" a sparser industrial area and there weren't any homes. I'm really curious about what the investigation will reveal in a few months. This doesn't look like a "regular" engine fire from a bird strike or so, you would normally expect the flames to come out the back and not over the wing. And at least in theory the MD-…

Zoning guidance generally prohibits land use near an airport that has a high density of people, precisely to limit casualties during an event like this. Industrial would be permitted while residential and commercial use is not. Scarily there are communities that have ignored such logic and permitted dense residential development right next to an airport.

UPS actually bought and destroyed thousands of homes near their end of the airport about 20 years ago, under the guise of 'noise', but realistically for expansion of warehousing. Now, I guess I feel slightly less upset by that (my childhood home was one of them).
Post reply on HN