Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport • Hacker News Board

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

#361

Post by IncRnd » Tue, Jan 17, 2023, 1:26 AM UTC

ddulaney wrote: post #230

IncRnd wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$10 million is not what is stated at your link. "In Western countries and other liberal democracies, estimates for the value of a statistical life typically range from US$1 million—US$10 million; for example, the United States FEMA estimated the value of a statistical life at US$7.5 million in 2020." [1] That's also not the meaning of Value of Life, which is a statistical evaluation. On a commercial plane there are a…

The VSL used in this case is $11.8 million in 2021, the most recent year it’s been adjusted for [0]. $10m is the usual rule-of-thumb. When making policies, governments generally pick a single value. Those “micro” VSL choices are one way governments can arrive at that value [1], but it’s certainly not the only way — economists have developed a bunch of different models which have (in some cases) wildly divergent outco…

The VSL is for the Valuation of a Statistical Life, which is shown at the first link you posted. That's entirely different from saying that all lives are treated as having the same value.

If you follow your link to the actual VSL guidance, you will see that. [1] There is even discussion regarding how advances in data science can be used for subgroup evaluation of VSLs.

[1] https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2021-03/D...

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

#362

Post by ddulaney » Tue, Jan 17, 2023, 2:04 AM UTC

IncRnd wrote: post #361

ddulaney wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The VSL used in this case is $11.8 million in 2021, the most recent year it’s been adjusted for [0]. $10m is the usual rule-of-thumb. When making policies, governments generally pick a single value. Those “micro” VSL choices are one way governments can arrive at that value [1], but it’s certainly not the only way — economists have developed a bunch of different models which have (in some cases) wildly divergent outco…

The VSL is for the Valuation of a Statistical Life, which is shown at the first link you posted. That's entirely different from saying that all lives are treated as having the same value. If you follow your link to the actual VSL guidance, you will see that. [1] There is even discussion regarding how advances in data science can be used for subgroup evaluation of VSLs. [1] https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov…

I think we’re on the same page here. You are discussing that individual lives are valued at various numbers. I’m pointing out that when deciding whether to implement safety mitigations, the government will in practice use a single value. From the link you posted:

“Prevention of an expected fatality is assigned a single, nationwide value in each year, regardless of the age, income, or other distinct characteristics of the affected population, the mode of travel, or the nature of the risk.”

I think reasonable people can disagree on whether it ever makes sense to use multiple different VSLs for different types of person. I happen to think that those kind of adjustments do more harm than good. But it’s all (literally) academic — actual policy is set based on a single VSL.

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

#363

Post by defrost » Tue, Jan 17, 2023, 2:35 AM UTC

dredmorbius wrote: post #329

defrost wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so there’s going to be at least some digging up the runway and repaving. The US doesn't have horizontal directional drilling rigs that go under a runway and pull cable?

Oil and gas rigs typically don't have to worry about intersecting other infrastructure. Even then, things occasionally go awry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Peigneur#Drilling_disaste... > For an airport, the precision required both to not hit extant underground infrastructure and to know precisely where your newly deployed infrastructure is (for the next guy/gal to worry about) is probably a salient concern. I'…

If you're not sure then you might like to forget about oil and gas drilling and look to suburban optic fibre cable laying in which a cable can be accurately laid following a curving S path about the countours of a curving road avoiding other known pipes over distances of 500+ m.

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

#364

Post by defrost » Tue, Jan 17, 2023, 2:38 AM UTC

chha wrote: post #352

defrost wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so there’s going to be at least some digging up the runway and repaving. The US doesn't have horizontal directional drilling rigs that go under a runway and pull cable?

Sure they do. But then you have a tunnel under the runway that will flood and potentially freeze. Crumbling concrete and nonflat surfaces is not something you want on a runway or taxiway.

Then you have an electrical cable in a conduit.

As opposed to the alternative described, where you close down the runway, dig out a full trench, lay a cable in a conduit, and attempt to compact every thing back to how it used to be?

You think that's a better alternative than just drill core'ing the conduit through?

Interesting.

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

#365

Post by moloch-hai » Tue, Jan 17, 2023, 2:49 AM UTC

saalweachter wrote: post #63

blackshaw wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you ask George Carlin: https://youtu.be/zDKdvTecYAM

Without re-watching the video in question, wasn't Carlin's complaint about a "near miss"? A "near collision" is everything he asked for.

Yeah, he's wrong.

Was it any kind of collision? No, it wasn't. There was no collision of any kind.

Was it any kind of miss? Yes, it was a miss. What kind? A near one.

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

#366

Post by user3939382 » Tue, Jan 17, 2023, 3:51 AM UTC

rmccue wrote: post #300

user3939382 wrote: post #200

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.

Worth keeping in mind that recordings of ATC are taken from people running ground stations, which may not have perfect line-of-sight to the transmitter at the airport, so recordings can be lower quality and more garbled than what the pilots are actually hearing.

Totally true, although the examples I was contemplating are like in a sibling comment to yours, where even the pilots are confused. I think a lot of pilots would agree that there’s room for improvement in diction with ATC. And of course not for the sake of aesthetics or something but for safety.

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

#367

Post by 93po » Tue, Jan 17, 2023, 4:26 AM UTC

wlonkly wrote: post #360

dylan604 wrote: post #104

DELTA1943: "Alright, and uh, woof!" ATC: "Delta 1943, are you able to taxi or do you need a couple of minutes to run checks?" DELTA1943: "Yeah, we can get off the runway" but they're all going to need a change of underwear!! And I thought the Brits were known for understatement!

I've really enjoyed watching various places transcribe the sound that DL1943 made after "Alright" there. I've seen "Uch", "Huff", "Phew", "Uew", and now "Woof"!

I've always been annoyed my entire life by the use of "woof" because I thought people were, for some reason, imitating the barking of a dog and it made no sense to me because I've never heard anyone in person do this, ever. 3+ decades later I now realize it's just a way of spelling any of the above.

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

#368

Post by zmgsabst » Tue, Jan 17, 2023, 4:53 AM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #338

zmgsabst wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you do a barrel roll in a plane full of passengers, when you’re being paid to operate it safely? Your entire hypothetical is unlike the actual scenario, where this is being recommended. Of course you have different solutions to a completely different problem — but what you haven’t addressed is why this is a bad solution to this particular problem.

nono, imagine you have a personal 1 seater plane The presence of a backup option affects your decision making. Human brain assumes the backup is reliable. If you install some 50/50 backup, you put more people at risk

Right — that situation is completely unlike the actual one. Different situations reasonably have different constraints.

Why is imagining something completely different useful?

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

#369

Post by KyleBerezin » Tue, Jan 17, 2023, 9:45 PM UTC

sandos wrote: post #291

dev_tty01 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, the American flight didn't follow directions or the lights. If that turns out to be the case, wow.

Could also be that they were not correctly set, the pilots thinking "hey, no red lights, we can go! Its 100% safe".

This is a good example of how ADDITIONAL safety systems can sometime become the de-facto safety system. A similar problem can happen with firearms, where if a mechanical safety is on, people sometimes disregard other rules of safe firearm handling, leading to accidents.

Pilots have a lot of info coming in at any given time, and there has been a move to reduce the amount of info, so they can focus on the more important items. The answer isn't always more warning lights or alarms.

Edit: By "This is a good example..." I am referring to the hypothetical situation, I am not confirming this actually happened.

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

#370

Post by dredmorbius » Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 9:20 PM UTC

defrost wrote: post #363

dredmorbius wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oil and gas rigs typically don't have to worry about intersecting other infrastructure. Even then, things occasionally go awry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Peigneur#Drilling_disaste... > For an airport, the precision required both to not hit extant underground infrastructure and to know precisely where your newly deployed infrastructure is (for the next guy/gal to worry about) is probably a salient concern. I'…

If you're not sure then you might like to forget about oil and gas drilling and look to suburban optic fibre cable laying in which a cable can be accurately laid following a curving S path about the countours of a curving road avoiding other known pipes over distances of 500+ m.

Thanks.

Any references / sources on that?