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

361–370 of 750 posts

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#361

Post by s-lambert »

meithecatte wrote: post #242
einhard wrote: post #22

I stitched together a small audio clip from LiveATC with both the Ground and Tower frequencies mapped to the Left and Right audio channels. It starts around the time the aircraft was cleared to land, and then skips forward to the moment the controllers realized the aircraft crashed. Here is a link to the .mp3 file (it's on Discord for now - I don't know if this is allowed, let me know if it isn't): https://cdn.discor…

The discord link will die soon. The attachment links started expiring at some point last year IIRC.

It'll sort of die, you can't access them directly but if you take the link and paste it into discord (like one with just yourself) then it'll still work.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#362

Post by signatoremo »

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…

Beijing and Shanghai are the two largest cities in China. There is enough demand to justify trains. There are also at least 50 daily flights between the two cities.

Now what is the demand between Minneapolis and Toronto?

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#363

Post by gnatman »

DidYaWipe wrote: post #338
danpalmer wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Others have answered this well, but a more interesting question to me is why we don’t have video of the flight deck recorded on flight recorders. We have the technology to do that reliably. It’s an interesting privacy concern really. Pilots don’t like the idea, somewhat understandably, who wants to be watched at work every minute of their day? But then it’s also a safety benefit and maybe that’ll win out eventually (…

Given that control inputs and maneuvers are all captured by the data recorder, what would you expect to gain from video of the cockpit?

Simple: additional context.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#364

Post by kortilla »

walthamstow wrote: post #290
windowshopping wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would that be "disrespectful"?

It could be read as calling people here rubberneckers, which is not exactly a compliment

The interest doesn’t come from wanting to see random destruction like rubberneckers do. Commercial passenger aviation is as safe as it gets and incidents require multiple things to go wrong.

An aviation disaster is a fascinating thing because it pushes forward safety protocols or engineering safeguards.

There is nothing interesting about a car that smashes into a guardrail, which is what rubberneckers are into.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#365

Post by Sateeshm »

lazyasciiart wrote: post #340
ceejayoz wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it's someone leaking footage by videoing another screen. I fully expect a clearer version to be released officially later.

Just think, people used to watch entire films this way.

And we liked it

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#366

Post by InDubioProRubio »

s-lambert wrote: post #361
meithecatte wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The discord link will die soon. The attachment links started expiring at some point last year IIRC.

It'll sort of die, you can't access them directly but if you take the link and paste it into discord (like one with just yourself) then it'll still work.

[flagged]

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#367

Post by InDubioProRubio »

DebtDeflation wrote: post #136
chrisco255 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did it roll after landing or before landing?

After touchdown, but it rolled sideways not end over end. This kept the fuselage intact and ripped off the wings (where all the fuel is) which is why everyone survived.

Maybe that would be a general great idea.. slide the people capsule away from the bomb in the final moments of a crash landing. But that would make it necessary to have the people capsule bolted on - with explosive destructible bolts and i think air-companies are not mentally ready yet for the crumble zone airplane.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#368

Post by lfaw »

bbor wrote: post #227
haunter wrote: post #7

Video from a passenger https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=617972644350232

Ok I'm not at all judging, or condemning. But this: 'I was just in a plane crash. Oh my God,' says one woman who filmed herself upside down in her airplane seat. Is a goddam surreal sign of the times. Absolutely surreal.

Well, I am judging this at least a little: Why is the first reaction of this passenger to make a video of herself? Makes me wonder if there ever was an accident where first aid was delayed because somebody had to make a video first....

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#369

Post by WalterBright »

rdtsc wrote: post #350
WalterBright wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it might be designed to rip off in this situation It isn't on any aircraft I've heard of. Only the engines have "fuses" which allow an engine to rip itself off without taking the wing with it. The wing root is the strongest part of the airplane (because that is where the maximum forces are).

There are other parts like that, like the gear struts that are designed to bend and snap instead instead of puncture through the wings, or the centering mechanism on turbofan shafts that's intentionally designed to break off if a blade breaks and cause an imbalance (I think that's what you meant by a "fuse", or did you mean something that rips the engine off altogether? I had never heard of that one).

The "fuse" that holds the engine on the strut is a bolt or a pin that is weaker than the surrounding structure, so it will break first and the engine will fall free.

If the engine loses a fan blade, it will vibrate violently and it's probably better to lose the engine.

I don't know about the other two things you mention. Maybe it's a newer feature than my time :-/

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#370

Post by kortilla »

lmm wrote: post #320
School-Cotton wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you really not imagine any reason why world-class rail between Beijing and Shanghai is more feasible than between Minneapolis and Toronto?

If you want to say something then say it. No, I don't think there's any particular physical reason for that; I think the poor state of north american passenger rail is almost entirely for political reasons and could be changed if the public had the will to improve it.

High speed rail requires density.

Toronto and Minneapolis are villages comparatively.

There are significant air routes in China between higher population cities than the MSP, YYZ pairing

Post reply on HN