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

381–390 of 469 posts

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#381

Post by ilamont »

Retric wrote: post #184
potato3732842 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can always come up with some pretext to justify things by ignoring the other side of the equation. How many lives do the man hours spent commuting, or toiling away to afford higher rents waste? IDK how the math pencils out, but an attempt ought to be made before drawing conclusions.

None? Nobody puts airports inside city centers and metro areas don’t just have dense urban housing. The common solution in many land strapped cities is for airports to rout aircraft over water often by building airports on reclaimed land. What generally gets areas in trouble is locations that used to be a good get worse as aircraft get larger and the surroundings get built up. The solution is to send larger airplanes…

> Nobody puts airports inside city centers

Taipei Songshan, Boston Logan and the old Hong Kong Kai Tak to name a few.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#382

Post by watwut »

loeg wrote: post #286
anal_reactor wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trust is hard to earn and easy to lose. It'll take a while before we look at American planes through lenses other than Boeing straight-up lying.

This aircraft was not built by Boeing.

It was build by a company that got merged with boeing and whose management ended up running Boeing. Which is what made Boeing known for issues.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#383

Post by jjwiseman »

cjrp wrote: post #106

The AVHerald is usually the best source for these things, rather than MSM: https://avherald.com/h?article=52f5748f&opt=0 > Ground observers reported the aircraft had been delayed for about two hours for work on the left hand engine (engine #1), the engine #1 separated during the takeoff run, the center engine emitted streaks of flames, the aircraft impacted a UPS warehouse and ploughed through other facilities before…

In today's NTSB briefing they said as far as they know the aircraft was not delayed and there was not maintenance work done immediately before the flight. https://www.youtube.com/live/Rw6CtQJckzE?si=9Q98BLIVDJbfZ1QV...

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#384

Post by Retric »

ilamont wrote: post #381
Retric wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None? Nobody puts airports inside city centers and metro areas don’t just have dense urban housing. The common solution in many land strapped cities is for airports to rout aircraft over water often by building airports on reclaimed land. What generally gets areas in trouble is locations that used to be a good get worse as aircraft get larger and the surroundings get built up. The solution is to send larger airplanes…

> Nobody puts airports inside city centers Taipei Songshan, Boston Logan and the old Hong Kong Kai Tak to name a few.

Boston Logan is surrounded by water to the point only one end of a single runway isn’t aimed directly at water soon crosses water. The city center requires crossing a bridge. Taipei is a little worse but its only runway is going next to a river here and aimed at a park on each side.

Hong Kong Kai Take would be a solid example except it closed in 1998 because of how the city grew. Look at maps from 1950 and it doesn’t look like a bad location for a small airport.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#385

Post by hshdhdhehd »

SpaghettiCthulu wrote: post #248
hshdhdhehd wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM reading the news could do this too!

You really want an LLM hallucinating that everything is ok and turning your air back on? Or hallucinating that everything was always ok and not turning your air off in the first place?

Hallucinate off is fine then send message to me with decision criteria.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#386

Post by hshdhdhehd »

fuzzythinker wrote: post #84
FabHK wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do runways have some sort of barrier between them and the next "important" thing. It seems like that would be prudent both for cases like this Ha, Jeju Air Flight 2216 smashed into a barrier on the second landing attempt in Muan last year [0], and people commented "How could there be a barrier at the end of the runway, so obviously stupid, irresponsible", etc. Now a plane does not smash into a barrier at the end of…

Or a ramp with "one-way teeth" that stops it with gravity and stops it from sliding back down with teeth.

linehedonist's comment is an idea that is shown to work

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

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#387

Post by matt-p »

Retric wrote: post #184
potato3732842 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can always come up with some pretext to justify things by ignoring the other side of the equation. How many lives do the man hours spent commuting, or toiling away to afford higher rents waste? IDK how the math pencils out, but an attempt ought to be made before drawing conclusions.

None? Nobody puts airports inside city centers and metro areas don’t just have dense urban housing. The common solution in many land strapped cities is for airports to rout aircraft over water often by building airports on reclaimed land. What generally gets areas in trouble is locations that used to be a good get worse as aircraft get larger and the surroundings get built up. The solution is to send larger airplanes…

In all honesty most countries in europe have at least one airport in a city centre. I mean look at lisbon, RKV, BHD/LCY (even glasgow,LHR to some extent), BMA, NCE.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#388

Post by [deleted] »

justsid wrote: post #4
haunter wrote: post #2

Video of the crash, left (?) engine was already engulfed in flames while taking off https://x.com/BNONews/status/1985845907191889930 https://xcancel.com/BNONews/status/1985845907191889930 Edit: just the mp4 https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1985845862409334784/pu/... There is an incredible amount of ground damage! Just wow, this is very bad https://files.catbox.moe/3303ob.jpg

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-…

[deleted]

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#389

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

positron26 wrote: post #91
loeg wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The wings and aerodynamics don't really care if air or air with combustion are flowing around them. Not saying it's what happened here, but if the heat is intense enough to deform the wing / control surfaces, it matters.

For skin, a few seconds might be significant. For the spars, not nearly enough time to matter. It's also not at cruise speed slamming into a downdraft or anything. This is about a 1G loading. Negligible for a while. While the fire looks cool, there's a lot of free stream mixing in and the temps won't really get that high beyond the cowling.

More likely is the hydraulics on that side burst, leading to a loss of pressure keeping the control surfaces deployed. If that lead to the leading-edge slats retracting (like they did in AA 191) you'd get a massive loss of lift on that side. The structural parts of the wing didn't have time to melt, but the fire certainly could damage all the internal control materials.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#390

Post by bluebarbet »

mrb wrote: post #125
cjrp wrote: post #106

The AVHerald is usually the best source for these things, rather than MSM: https://avherald.com/h?article=52f5748f&opt=0 > Ground observers reported the aircraft had been delayed for about two hours for work on the left hand engine (engine #1), the engine #1 separated during the takeoff run, the center engine emitted streaks of flames, the aircraft impacted a UPS warehouse and ploughed through other facilities before…

Oh woah, very insightful discussion thread you found there. So the tl'dr is: the leading very preliminary theory is that the MD-11's left engine fell off the wing just like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191 (a DC-10, the immediate predecessor of the MD-11) which was caused by maintenance errors weakening the pylon structure holding the engine.

From all the annals of aviation disaster, flight 191 is possibly the one that haunts my nightmares the worst. Perhaps because the scenario feels plausible for every single take-off. Perhaps just because of the famous photo.
Post reply on HN