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

Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

aeroxplorer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 386 posts

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#41

Post by blibble »

vkou wrote: post #14
reacharavindh wrote: post #3

How in the world would any common Russian trust an airplane in this current sanctioned state in Russia and fly in one?! Are people that brainwashed to trust their leader to get on a plane that doesn’t have brakes?!

> How in the world would any common Russian trust an airplane in this current sanctioned state in Russia and fly in one?! 1. What are the alternatives? Spend five days traveling by rail? 2. It's probably still safer, per mile traveled, than my driving commute, and I don't give climbing into a car a second thought.

> 2. It's probably still safer, per mile traveled, than my driving commute, and I don't give climbing into a car a second thought.

maybe at the start when everything was within its specified flying hours

but after a few years it's going to be way worse

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#42

Post by trefoiled »

throwawaysleep wrote: post #12
reacharavindh wrote: post #3

How in the world would any common Russian trust an airplane in this current sanctioned state in Russia and fly in one?! Are people that brainwashed to trust their leader to get on a plane that doesn’t have brakes?!

Life matters not there. Not in war. Not in peace. Not in travel. Not in home. Most Western countries obsess about proventing deaths. The USA does as well, except among poor people and gun victims.

this is just open racism

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#45

Post by wmil »

woodruffw wrote: post #24
keddad wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I flew from Moscow to Vladivastok recently, and it's a choice between 8 hour flight and a week in a train. The planes might be missing some maintenance, but they are certainly not falling out of the skies, and it's not like the trains can't fail (especially considering occasional train tracks sabotages). There are always risks, it's not that big of a deal.

I think the more apples-to-apples comparison here would be a train without breaks, wouldn't it be? After all, people can sabotage airfields and airplanes as well.

Trains are more vulnerable because they will always have long unguarded sections of track.

A train without breaks isn't really comparable because the planes can break using thrusters. I don't believe that you can engine break on a train to a comparable degree.

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#46

Post by [deleted] »

zapdrive wrote: post #31

How hard is it to manufacture an airplane brake? Surely Russia does have the required precision machining equipment and expertise. Of course a lot of that is being devoted to mass manufacture of weapons and other military equipment. I'm sure they can (and maybe in due time, they will) reroute some of those resources towards airplane parts. In my opinion, Russia is sometimes a little slow to react, but once the shit h…

[deleted]

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#47

Post by closewith »

blibble wrote: post #38
keddad wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I flew from Moscow to Vladivastok recently, and it's a choice between 8 hour flight and a week in a train. The planes might be missing some maintenance, but they are certainly not falling out of the skies, and it's not like the trains can't fail (especially considering occasional train tracks sabotages). There are always risks, it's not that big of a deal.

> but they are certainly not falling out of the skies they will be shortly and you won't hear about it unless you're on it

Hard to hide an airliner crash in this day and age. Certainly over land, anyway.

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#48

Post by keddad »

mudil wrote: post #22
keddad wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I flew from Moscow to Vladivastok recently, and it's a choice between 8 hour flight and a week in a train. The planes might be missing some maintenance, but they are certainly not falling out of the skies, and it's not like the trains can't fail (especially considering occasional train tracks sabotages). There are always risks, it's not that big of a deal.

Good luck with this logic.

What is the alternative, curl up and cry? Doing anything (especially anything interesting) involves taking risks. Not to mention that I probably have more chances of being arrested or conscripted then actually suffering in an airplane accident, they are still quite safe. I don't think that worrying about everything, especially things as basic as an airplane travel, will do you any good.

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#49

Post by woodruffw »

krisoft wrote: post #36
woodruffw wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the more apples-to-apples comparison here would be a train without breaks, wouldn't it be? After all, people can sabotage airfields and airplanes as well.

> I think the more apples-to-apples comparison here would be a train without breaks, wouldn't it be No. Not really. Russia has the means to produce brakes for their trains. They do not have the means to do the same for these airplanes. So the reality on the ground is that the trains have brakes while the airplanes don't (or they have breaks but with rapidly aging out of compliance parts.)

> No. Not really. Russia has the means to produce brakes for their trains. They do not have the means to do the same for these airplanes.

I meant in terms of riders' perceptions of safety, not industrial capacity. That being said, it astounds me that Russia can't fabricate replacement breaks here: we're talking about a country with some of the best metallurgists in the world and a domestic aerospace industry; what gives?

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#50

Post by wkat4242 »

keddad wrote: post #20
reacharavindh wrote: post #3

How in the world would any common Russian trust an airplane in this current sanctioned state in Russia and fly in one?! Are people that brainwashed to trust their leader to get on a plane that doesn’t have brakes?!

I flew from Moscow to Vladivastok recently, and it's a choice between 8 hour flight and a week in a train. The planes might be missing some maintenance, but they are certainly not falling out of the skies, and it's not like the trains can't fail (especially considering occasional train tracks sabotages). There are always risks, it's not that big of a deal.

> The planes might be missing some maintenance, but they are certainly not falling out of the skies

Yet.

You don't want to be in the first one that does.

Planes have gone down for much stupider reasons. Even serious airlines like KLM (Cityhopper) and Air France have flown perfectly good aircraft into the ground. It doesn't have to be faulty, human confusion is enough.

Going outside of normal procedures like this reduces redundancy and increases the chances of confusion and error.

Post reply on HN