651–660 of 750 posts
Clear view from the plane waiting to take off https://www.reddit.com/r/CatastrophicFailure/comments/1isabt... Which also brings into mind cockpit distractions but its amazing they caught this on video.
That was a navy landing. Looks like the landing gear buckled. Also doesn’t look like there was much flaring prior to touchdown.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
The FAA will actually fully investigate this as the issue COULD be due to pilot error or equipment failure. So it is still potentially an issue outside of the weather.
Because the NTSB helps investigates. And the host country leads the investigation.
And yes it could be anything, but most likely it was the bad weather.
If you're going to speculate, go for the most likely one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> However the runway landing was 33, or 330° magnetic. They were landing on runway 23. > At the reported -9°c if the runway has been de-iced it could be dry I guess? From the NOTAM, the runway condition codes for 23 were 5/5/5, so not dry, but "good". [1] https://avherald.com/h?article=52439b47&opt=1
FYI: Canadian runways use true north, not magnetic.
I haven't used a compass since I was a kid and at that time declination where I live was 21 degrees. Now it's down to 13 degrees. I had no idea it changed that much.
[flagged]
How did the plane flip? Do we have any reason to believe it could be reasonably avoided with regulations?
Regulation isn't going to affect any of that.
Why the plane was landing hot at a high sink-rate (1200 fpm vs. ~600 max on stabilised approach), with no flaps, might have some grounding in regulation, or more likely, maintenance and operations standards, but uninformed speculation is highly premature and the focus on such points is utterly unjustified distraction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Considering how much effort it takes the NTSB to reconstruct the chain of events from the crash site and flight data recorder, any high-resolution video could be very valuable. In particular I think all airliners should have 4K "dashcams" considering how inexpensive the technology now is. Crashes aside, a high-res Tower view would also make a great live webcam for enthusiasts to watch while listening to LiveATC.
A view just out the front of the plane wouldn't do much to help crash investigations and one of the big reasons they don't is you have to make a large enough storage resilient enough it can reasonably survive a crash. Most crashes are no where near this gentle. Far more useful would be an interior cockpit view showing the crew and the actions they were taking but a lot of that is recorded to the FDR on newer planes t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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
To give an extreme example, imagine someone starts passenger service from Earth to some planet in the Andromeda galaxy. Each flight carries 100 people. Once the warp field is stabilized the rest of the trip is 100% safe. However when the warp field is turned on their is a 99% chance that it will collapse rather than stabilize, which will destroy the ship and kill everyone aboard.
These Andromeda flights are 5 orders of magnitude safer than commercial air travel when measures by passenger fatalities per mile.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don’t forget OSHA. Those chemicals and nomex turnout gear are a source of elevated cancers in firefighters.
...and not the large amounts of smoke they're exposed to?
There’s a lot of people on fire service in my family. The old guys have bad knees, are dead, and have smoking related issues. The younger (<50) guys are getting neck, throat and lymph node cancers. 70% of line of duty deaths are due to occupational cancer.
Video from a passanger, the hull is upside down! https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=617972644350232
I know they need to control any possibility of a fire but man would it be a rude awakening to escape a significant plane crash, release your seatbelt while hanging upside down, make it to the exit door and then get sprayed in the face with cold water on a February day in Toronto.
When it's your time to go ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> However the runway landing was 33, or 330° magnetic. They were landing on runway 23. > At the reported -9°c if the runway has been de-iced it could be dry I guess? From the NOTAM, the runway condition codes for 23 were 5/5/5, so not dry, but "good". [1] https://avherald.com/h?article=52439b47&opt=1
FYI: Canadian runways use true north, not magnetic.
https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/dnd-mdn/images/technical-a...
Airports in the southern half of Canada still use magnetic for runways.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way we increase the chances that everybody reading this will behave appropriately if they're ever in this situation is by strongly condemning those who did not.
He says, from his comfortable chair, and behind a keyboard, and not having just experienced a horrific plane crash.
