501–510 of 750 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looks like a microburst to me, but same family as windshear
This is a pretty infamous video catching a microburst event on camera https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_WmjWAGkLI (no injuries),
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So are you saying that the root cause of this crash (and the others I suppose) is something that happened in the last 4 weeks?
I cannot imagine the logic of that, so not sure why that response. What I was referring to, is the potential for state actors to breed fear re: air travel. It would be crushing economically, and create general disarray via distrust of core services.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So are you saying that the root cause of this crash (and the others I suppose) is something that happened in the last 4 weeks?
Only that that is a more likely explanation than "subtle hacking". It could of course all be coincidence, or it could have to do with consequences of 1) election of a wrecking-ball administration hell-bent on destroying all regulations, and 2) terrorizing the entire federal workforce including the Air Traffic Controllers. The heaviest-casualty US crash in 16 years happened shortly after a "you should all resign now"…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess I’m only 1/4 libertarian. I don’t think competition is enough. The risk of harm needs to be balanced as well. With airplanes, you have not only the risk to paying customers, but to bystanders who in many cases cannot be made whole in the event of an accident (i.e., you might get a financial settlement if an airplane crashes into your house, but that won’t bring your family members who were in the house back t…
I'm pro airline regulation given the current state of the market. But you could also argue the airline industry is fairly concentrated. There are only so many airlines. If a Delta flight crashes, you might still fly Delta again in the future, because there are only so many options. Now imagine if there were as many airlines as restaurants. If one Delta flight messes up in any way, people would never fly them again. T…
That's great and everything, but I don't see what it has to do with what I wrote: even given infinite competition, the risk to the public from an improperly managed airline is great. If an airplane fell out of the sky onto my house, I'd be glad for them to go out of business, but that wouldn't fix my house or heal or revive the people inside the house.
There is simply no amount of competition that would change that dynamic. The concepts are orthogonal.
I don't work in the airline industry, but my father in law did. He was a large jet mechanic. He constantly told stories of airline managers pressuring mechanics (and inspectors) to sign off on returning airplanes to service that were not airworthy, at least by regulation. Some gizmo or another would be broken and it just wouldn't seem like it should be such a big deal. We need this plane back in the air. What's taking you so long?
Competition doesn't make those people go away. If anything, more competition would make those kinds of people more likely to be upset over a plane not generating revenue over what (to them) seems like a minor problem.
Regulation is what keeps those people in check. Today, the airline can't overrule the licensed mechanic or inspector. The licensed expert has to personally sign off that needed repairs are performed and performed correctly, not the idiot who just doesn't understand what the big deal is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lowkey mad at the lady dragging her hand luggage.
Just for a different point of view, my wife is Type 1 Diabetic - no way she’d be leaving her medical stuff. It’s probably not that, but is possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Many airplanes (not sure about the CRJ) also have a center wing tank, which is directly under the fuselage, so would be kinda hard to separate cleanly. Also, explosive bolts might start a fire that wouldn't have started without the bolts...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just for a different point of view, my wife is Type 1 Diabetic - no way she’d be leaving her medical stuff. It’s probably not that, but is possible.
> Just for a different point of view, my wife is Type 1 Diabetic - no way she’d be leaving her medical stuff. Perhaps a fanny pack would be a better idea: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanny_pack
It also goes without saying that you should keep in on while showering and sleeping too, you never know when your hotel could catch on fire.
The consensus on r/aviation seems to be that it was caused by wind shear. > This looks like wind shear to me. It was a stable approach and then it suddenly got slammed into the ground. That doesn't look like pilot-induced change in descent rate, it is too sudden for that. A sudden change in wind direction (shear) when that slow can absolutely cause a sudden loss of lift. > We have had almost 2 feet of snow up here si…
Looks like a microburst to me, but same family as windshear
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just for a different point of view, my wife is Type 1 Diabetic - no way she’d be leaving her medical stuff. It’s probably not that, but is possible.
I don’t know much about T1 diabet so please excuse me if I’m asking the obvious: don’t you expect to find everything necessary in an international airport like Toronto? I mean in pharmacies but also with the airport medic team? My first though in a similar crash would be to get out ASAP to avoid me or someone else roasting, although it may be so stressful that rational thinking may not be at its best.
People die in hospital waiting rooms. Why risk it when you know you have everything you need right on hand? At this time in the video the situation looked to already be fairly under control. Worrying about recording a video on your phone to post to social media before you’re even out seems worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This might cover say half of one's laptop, which no matter how stupid it sounds, makes taking your luggage with you the only financially sensible choice in a crash (unless you have insurance). If there's no smoke, no visible flames, and you can do so safely without obstructing other passengers' egress? I can see the argument, sure. Obviously if the cabin is filling with smoke or there are visible flames or other ob…
I'm not arguing it's right. Frankly, I think it's stupid the way things are. But I can understand why some people make such choice. I guess my argument mainly is that people who take their luggage are not stupid, instead their behavior may be highly rational, however we have the means to change it with by making such choice irrational and I wish we will.
I agree with your parent’s post explaining its a sensible financial choice. However as you noted there’s other things One could consider like other’s passagers survival chances or firefighter taking dangerous steps during their work.
Taking your language is financially sensible but socially dumb and selfish. It seems an acceptable choices in the countries that values individual liberties and financial independence, but the other half of the world look very bad at that behavior.