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

Alaska Airlines 737 Max makes emergency landing due to depressurization

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 384 posts

Re: Alaska Airlines 737 Max makes emergency landing due to depressurization

#41

Post by kijin »

carbocation wrote: post #35
pengaru wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not a big gaping structural hole. It's an exit door opening, not some random part of the fuselage developing a potentially structure-compromising hole...

Bad wording on my part since I implied but didn't state the alternative. In my mind, the alternative scenario that would create a depressurization event would be a small hole or a hole that is not visible from the passenger compartment. I.e., a hole from which a passenger or attendant could not exit the plane.

Wouldn't a small hole quickly become a large gaping hole anyway, if it's large enough to affect the cabin pressure?

I suppose if the small hole had existed since before takeoff, you could avoid catastrophic damage as the aircraft will not be pressurized at all. I wouldn't call it a depressurization event, though.

Re: Alaska Airlines 737 Max makes emergency landing due to depressurization

#42

Post by TylerE »

cjbprime wrote: post #40
carbocation wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this phrase generating ambiguity, in this circumstance, where a better description would not be ambiguous?

Yes. I think the aviation community would use something like "explosive uncontrolled depressurization", to distinguish from e.g. someone forgetting to arm the pressurization system.

You can't depressurize what isn't pressurized. Also, there isn't a "if you forget this everyone suffocates" button. The controls are multiply guarded and "normally closed".

Re: Alaska Airlines 737 Max makes emergency landing due to depressurization

#43

Post by cjbprime »

notatoad wrote: post #39
carbocation wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nomenclature is interesting. In my mind, a "depressurization event" would imply that the biggest problem was the depressurization. In other words, that there was not a big gaping structural hole. If there can be a big hole in the plane and we can call that a "depressurization event", I would like to advocate for changing how we describe this.

if the big gaping hole is only a problem because it causes a "depressurization event", then categorizing it as a depressurization event make sense?

seat you are sitting on gets literally ejected from the airplane

"Man, it's unfortunate that there's a problem with the pressurization system in this.. sky."

Re: Alaska Airlines 737 Max makes emergency landing due to depressurization

#44

Post by gigatexal »

Morte42 wrote: post #28
mustardboy wrote: post #10

Tiktok video of the event posted to twitter. https://twitter.com/avgeekjake/status/1743474494411608489?s=...

Man.. if I hadnt seen it I wouldn't have believed it.That is absurd. How the FAA keeps approving this junk from Boeing is even more concerning than how bad Boeing manufacturing has become.

Yeah … I kinda wanna make sure we fly airbus planes now cuz what is going on with Boeing’s QA?

Re: Alaska Airlines 737 Max makes emergency landing due to depressurization

#45

Post by cjbprime »

TylerE wrote: post #42
cjbprime wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I think the aviation community would use something like "explosive uncontrolled depressurization", to distinguish from e.g. someone forgetting to arm the pressurization system.

You can't de pressurize what isn't pressurized. Also, there isn't a "if you forget this everyone suffocates" button. The controls are multiply guarded and "normally closed".

That sounds lovely, but over here in reality we have:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522

> An investigation into the crash by the Air Accident Investigation and Aviation Safety Board (AAIASB) concluded that the crew had neglected to set the pressurization system to automatic during the take-off checks. This caused the plane not to be pressurized during the flight and resulted in nearly everyone on board suffering from generalized hypoxia, thus resulting in a ghost flight [..] eventually crashed near Grammatiko, Greece, killing all 121 passengers and crew on board. It is the deadliest aviation accident in Greek history.

Re: Alaska Airlines 737 Max makes emergency landing due to depressurization

#46

Post by TylerE »

cjbprime wrote: post #45
TylerE wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't de pressurize what isn't pressurized. Also, there isn't a "if you forget this everyone suffocates" button. The controls are multiply guarded and "normally closed".

That sounds lovely, but over here in reality we have: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522 > An investigation into the crash by the Air Accident Investigation and Aviation Safety Board (AAIASB) concluded that the crew had neglected to set the pressurization system to automatic during the take-off checks. This caused the plane not to be pressurized during the flight and resulted in nearly everyone o…

That's pilot error. You have to move multiple safeguards and covers to move it OUT of auto in the first place. There is a reason (very poor training and safety practices, often government corruption as well) that you hear about accidents like that happening in Greece, Vietnam or Ethiopia, not the US.

Re: Alaska Airlines 737 Max makes emergency landing due to depressurization

#47

Post by [deleted] »

pengaru wrote: post #34
carbocation wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nomenclature is interesting. In my mind, a "depressurization event" would imply that the biggest problem was the depressurization. In other words, that there was not a big gaping structural hole. If there can be a big hole in the plane and we can call that a "depressurization event", I would like to advocate for changing how we describe this.

> not a big gaping structural hole. It's an exit door opening, not some random part of the fuselage developing a potentially structure-compromising hole...

[deleted]

Re: Alaska Airlines 737 Max makes emergency landing due to depressurization

#48

Post by nimbius »

Morte42 wrote: post #28
mustardboy wrote: post #10

Tiktok video of the event posted to twitter. https://twitter.com/avgeekjake/status/1743474494411608489?s=...

Man.. if I hadnt seen it I wouldn't have believed it.That is absurd. How the FAA keeps approving this junk from Boeing is even more concerning than how bad Boeing manufacturing has become.

not much choice. Boeing is practically the only US manufacturer of widebody passenger jets and enjoys a privileged position as such. there is literally no other American competition for passenger air.

Alternatives include the Chinese Comac 929, Sukhoi SSJ100, or A320 from Airbus. the first two are non-starters as most north american politicians are furiously opposed to the idea of carriers so much as looking at chinese or russian passenger jets. the A320 on the other hand, while arguably a better widebody jet than anything Boeing has ever produced, has the same political hand-wringing and strong arming from lobbyists and airline executives alike. American Airlines replaced a chunk of their fleet with the A320 because the Dreamliner was literally killing about as many people as it managed to transport when it wasnt down for loose bolts or reboots due to battery issues.

Given enough time and without meaningful reform and intervention by Washington, Boeing will literally hand the win over to these 3 other competitors just like AT&T handed over 5G to Huawei. Ironic considering Airbus was originally a Boeing joint venture.

Re: Alaska Airlines 737 Max makes emergency landing due to depressurization

#49

Post by [deleted] »

pengaru wrote: post #34
carbocation wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nomenclature is interesting. In my mind, a "depressurization event" would imply that the biggest problem was the depressurization. In other words, that there was not a big gaping structural hole. If there can be a big hole in the plane and we can call that a "depressurization event", I would like to advocate for changing how we describe this.

> not a big gaping structural hole. It's an exit door opening, not some random part of the fuselage developing a potentially structure-compromising hole...

[deleted]
Post reply on HN