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

Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 633 posts

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#591

Post by defrost »

foldr wrote: post #590
defrost wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At no point did I claim that multiple engine aircraft cannot complete a take off on a single engine. The statement I made: > Aircraft can land (in right circumstances) by gliding in sans power .. the same cannot be said for take offs. is about having _ no _ thrust power during take off. The other statement I made acknowledged that test pilots in planned and scheduled clear weather conditions often test aircraft with…

You did challenge the claim that they could complete take off on a single engine: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44256705

Not at all.

Landing sans power is landing with no thrust (no functioning engine).

Completing a take off with no thrust isn't possible unless the craft is a glider, a hot balloon, or a ballistic launch .. taking off with a single engine is not "taking off sans power".

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#592

Post by account42 »

impulser_ wrote: post #550
ragazzina wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why is it always foreign airlines that crash? And why is it always Boeing planes?

I'm not sure, my guess is maybe foreign pilots are less fimilar with Boeing planes. The reason for the Max crashes from the past was due to the pilots not getting enough training on the new plane and made assumptions about it based on the previous generation plane. It wasn't the actual plane that was bad it was Boeing training wasn't good enough for pilots to understand the changes they made.

Pilots didn't get new training because Boeing (tried to) design it not to need new training.

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#593

Post by M95D »

fortran77 wrote: post #207
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #25

Gentle tip from a lifelong aviation enthusiast: wait one week before reading on causation. Exposing yourself to first-week speculation isn’t just unproductive, it’s often counterproductive since the actual findings can rhyme with the false speculation closely enough that you wind up muddling the two in your mind.

As I've learned from years of reading Hacker News, people who program computers are experts in _everything_!

If we program computers, it doesn't mean we don't have other jobs unrelated to programming. (At least for some of us.)

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#594

Post by Onavo »

madaxe_again wrote: post #518
Onavo wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, if you don't want your wings anymore. The wings are the primary fuel tanks. You can drain the fuel out during flight but the process can take hours.

Ah, the old “Wings Stay On/Wings Fall Off” button.

There is a fuel drain button, it's just slow. Google "fuel jettison". Sometimes you have to make an emergency descent and the plane is too heavy (or too dangerous to carry so much fuel). From the ground it would look like "chemtrails". You can look up videos of this on YouTube.

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#595

Post by DanielleMolloy »

sailingparrot wrote: post #399
DanielleMolloy wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the same but he implies that the screens were not the only tech not working (AC, seats damaged). It is quite an intuition to decide to leave a plane in such a moment. He just escaped death and is now aggressively attacked for saying something potentially relevant.

He did not leave the plane, he said he was on the previous flight from Delhi to Ahmedabad, before the plane then went on to do the Ahmedabad - London flight when it crashed. You can see his flight ticket in the tweet.

Ok, thank you, didn't realize. He wrote two hours and I expected this to be another long-haul flight.

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#597

Post by amiga386 »

impulser_ wrote: post #548
amiga386 wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there hasn't been a single major accident like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191 > American Airlines Flight 191 crashed shortly after lifting off the runway at Chicago O'Hare Airport [...] The accident was attributed to improper maintenance procedures. The crash resulted in the deaths of all 271 passengers and crew on board, as well as two people on the ground. https://en.wikipedia.org…

I'm not talking about accidents from 40 and 20 years ago. I'm talking about the recent 737 accidents both this one and the previous Max crashes.

What you're doing is running your mouth and implying there's some sort of magic that makes the USA -- probably the country you live in -- special. All other countries must obviously be inferior, incompetent, in comparison to the glorious USA.

That's not how planes work, that's not how aviation safety is advanced. There have been hundreds of accidents and there's no value in cherry-picking specific timeframes (while not actually stating you were cherry-picking until challenged on it), nor specific categories of accident (fatal accidents with hull loss only).

This is not the right way to view it: https://www.statista.com/statistics/262867/fatal-civil-airli...

THIS is the right way to view it: https://www.panish.law/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/PSBR-Aviat...

So is this: https://accidentstats.airbus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/...

And this (page 8): https://www.boeing.com/content/dam/boeing/boeingdotcom/compa...

(and if you want to apportion geographic blame - for Boeing airframes only - check out pages 17-24)

When there are accidents, the right thing to do is to analyse how it happened, come up with findings that might reduce the likelyhood of it happening again, or eliminate it, and push all people in aviation to adopt those findings - whether it be manufacturer, ATC, airline, or pilot, and regardless of country.

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#598

Post by thecosmicfrog »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #583
buildsjets wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Most airliners CANNOT dump fuel. This capability is limited to long range wide bodies, like this 787. Neither the 737 nor the A320, which constitute the majority of commercial air traffic, can dump fuel. Fuel dumping is normally performed at an altitude where it should be able to evaporate before hitting the ground, and it takes a long time, maybe 15 minutes to get from full fuel to maximum landing weight. Using…

Didn't Sully dump fuel before landing in the Hudson, thereby increasing the buoyancy of the plane?

No, the Airbus A320 cannot dump fuel.

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#599

Post by ExoticPearTree »

ihuk wrote: post #257
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the RAT deployed on the video on Reddit. Can you tell the timestamp to zoom in? I'm super curious.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GtPFDrnbAAA6c68?format=jpg&name=... It could be the blurry object under the fuselage, just to the right of the left engine.

From another video, the RAT on the 787 is on the right.

New videos came out and so far the prevailing theory is that flaps were retracted too soon. Most likely instead of gear up.

Re: Air India flight to London crashes in Ahmedabad with more than 240 onboard

#600

Post by drcongo »

wkat4242 wrote: post #563
drcongo wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally get that, and agree to a degree. For me personally though, the news industry has become entertainment - TV news is hyperbolic, 24 hour breaking news for every story, newspapers (at least here in the UK) are little more than a propaganda outlet for the views of the billionaire owner where every story is designed to make people angry and point the blame at someone, usually immigrants. For years I listened to…

That "BREAKING NEWS" fuss is kinda a US specific thing though. In Holland we just watch the news at 6 or 8pm (at least for those who still do that) which is very factual. Or we read nu.nl or nos.nl which don't really have screaming clickbaity headlines unless some shit really hit a fan. Which is really rare. I prefer nos.nl because nu.nl has too much celebrity news for me. But we don't have any of that weird "Watch t…

I'm in the UK and while nowhere near as mad as US news channels, it's definitely been heading in that direction for a while. Even the BBC, our publicly funded station is like it now thanks to several years of the far right campaigning to get the BBC's funding taken away. Tune in to BBC news now and you're highly likely to see stories on "issues" that 90% of the population has no interest or opinion on, but some swivel-eyed, right wing fringe nutjobs have managed to push into mainstream news.
Post reply on HN