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

581–590 of 750 posts

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#581

Post by einhard »

lucgommans wrote: post #468
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…

Rehosted so it'll stay alive at least a few years: https://lucgommans.nl/tmp/YYZ_Crash.mp3 >. Let me know if you'd like something more permanent than my tmp dump folder, or a filename that gives credits or so! (BTW if you're editing clips, I can recommend exporting to Opus instead of ancient MP3: released in ~2012 so support is very good by now and it's like twice the quality at the same file size, probably even bett…

Hey, thank you so much. I shared the Discord file because I was sharing it with some friends, and then thought HN might be interested, but I don't have a more convenient place to serve the file at the moment. Thank you for hosting it.

Good point about exporting to Opus! I used .mp3 because the original audio files were also in .mp3. I've re-exported the file in Opus now, let me know what would be the best way to send it to you.

As for file name and credits, I think it's probably best to credit LiveATC (https://www.liveatc.net/), since that's where I got the original audio and I didn't really do much else beyond separating the channels. The specific files I used are the YYZ Ground and YYZ Tower recordings from February 17th that start at 1900z.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#582

Post by SteveNuts »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #534
lqet wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the same thread, an AMA by a passenger: https://old.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1is5unz/i_was_on_the_f... Just to emphasize how insanely lucky they were: > From inside we didn't see any of the fire, thank goodness! We were all upside down to start with, but many of us were able to release themselves pretty quickly. After that the "upright" of us helped the upside-down until we were all righted and ready to evacuat…

> the other one poured jet fuel in when they opened it welp guess i'm never flying again

[flagged]

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#583

Post by havefunbesafe »

lfaw wrote: post #368
bbor wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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....

I think theres some tech sway here. Ex: I wonder how technology changes how we recall events and WHEN we recall them. The plane that flipped upside down being a great example. Likely less than 1% of people use a diary to recount insanely major events of their lives. In the 1980s, lets say 80% of people used diaries/journals to recount the events of their lives. That number today is probably less than 1%. But NOW 100% of people use their phones to recount events via video. They dont try to remember what happened, since its there captured at the time of the event. Diaries recount the event after the information has decayed and there’s a minds-eye element to it, so it has additional subjectivity because reading a diary you have to imagine what happened in the past instead of a visual aid.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#584

Post by einhard »

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 makes sense, I don't suppose Discord is particularly interested in being a file-sharing site.

See the comment above about hosting the file in a more permanent way.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#585

Post by rdtsc »

WalterBright wrote: post #369
rdtsc wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 :-/

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

That's the idea with a fan blade loss, they didn't want to just drop an engine in that case so the centering mechanism on the turbine has an intentionally weaker part is designed to snap off to allow the spinning turbine to recenter itself as opposed to vibrating the whole structure off and causing more damage.

The gear thing is to prevent puncturing the fuel tanks in the wings on a hard landing. It's preferable to snap off the gear, otherwise leaking fuel has a good chance of it immediately igniting.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#586

Post by hinkley »

stouset wrote: post #260
hinkley wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look up stress to failure tests on commercial airplanes. They know how much peak load is supposed to be for the airframe, then they go well beyond it to see how the plane fails. Generally you want the wings to break not the fuselage. You can in a lot of situations land a plane with 1.5 wings. But once the spine cracks you’re just a ballistic object.

The fuselage isn’t being stressed in a wing load test. There is zero way the fuselage could stand up to the level of force being applied to the wings.

I would submit to you that it’s impossible to load the wings at 150% of max load without transferring any of that force into the fuselage. Look at any finite element analysis of complex shapes. The force spreads out from areas of max tension or compression, and goes around corners.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#587

Post by account42 »

SteveNuts wrote: post #582
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the other one poured jet fuel in when they opened it welp guess i'm never flying again

[flagged]

Wait until you hear how many car crashes there are per moth and how many fatal hiking accidents. You'll never travel again! That is, until you learn how many people pass away in their own home.

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#588

Post by daedrdev »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #534
lqet wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the same thread, an AMA by a passenger: https://old.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/1is5unz/i_was_on_the_f... Just to emphasize how insanely lucky they were: > From inside we didn't see any of the fire, thank goodness! We were all upside down to start with, but many of us were able to release themselves pretty quickly. After that the "upright" of us helped the upside-down until we were all righted and ready to evacuat…

> the other one poured jet fuel in when they opened it welp guess i'm never flying again

Per mine and per hour flying is still much safer than driving

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#589

Post by theultdev »

theossuary wrote: post #520
fooker wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a new administration in Canada?

It's an American plane, serviced and maintained by an American company, and flown by an American airline. Pretty sure they're referring to that.

Pretty sure the wind doesn't care about what country the plane is from.

Seems to me it was either unavoidable or Canadian air traffic control shouldn't have let them land in those conditions.

Nothing to do with Trump or the FAA, as much as people would like it to be.

Never let a crisis go to waste I guess?

Re: Plane crashes, overturns during landing at Toronto airport

#590

Post by tomcar288 »

account42 wrote: post #587
SteveNuts wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Wait until you hear how many car crashes there are per moth and how many fatal hiking accidents. You'll never travel again! That is, until you learn how many people pass away in their own home.

Wait until you hear how many people pass away as a result of eating cheeseburgers! Only somewhat kidding here.

The number of people that die from heart disease and stroke and diabetes is far far greater than plane crashes or car crashes.

Metabolic syndrome is a large constellation of diseases and scientists have discovered that many of them are largely preventable through diet and lifestyle choices!

Post reply on HN