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

Preliminary report into Air India crash released

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 924 posts

Re: Preliminary report into Air India crash released

#891

Post by account42 »

bigDinosaur wrote: post #237
cjbprime wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is no possible way to confuse these two actions. This is obviously an overstatement. Any two regularly performed actions can be confused. Sometimes (when tired or distracted) I've walked into my bathroom intending to shave, but mistakenly brushed my teeth and left. My toothbrush and razor are not similar in function or placement.

If someone confused their steering wheel for the brake you'd probably be surprised - there are indeed errors that are essentially impossible for a competent person to make by mistake. No idea about the plane controls, though.

Essentially impossible is not the same as impossible. We already know that an improbably sequence of events took place because a plane crashed which is highly unusual.

Re: Preliminary report into Air India crash released

#892

Post by account42 »

1970-01-01 wrote: post #656
cjbprime wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is no possible way to confuse these two actions. This is obviously an overstatement. Any two regularly performed actions can be confused. Sometimes (when tired or distracted) I've walked into my bathroom intending to shave, but mistakenly brushed my teeth and left. My toothbrush and razor are not similar in function or placement.

Technically an overstatement but not by much. Correctly restated, its highly unlikely these actions were confusing pilots. It's as if you mistook flushing your toilet twice when instead you wanted to turn on the lights in your bathroom.

Well if we are going by "unlikely" equals "didn't happen" then we can conclude that the plane didn't crash.

Re: Preliminary report into Air India crash released

#893

Post by account42 »

anonymars wrote: post #527
sxg wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now try to design a plane that also lets you rapidly shutoff fuel to both engines in case of fire.

How about actual switch covers (and switches that are not located right in the same area as stuff you are using routinely) instead of a glorified detent? Though I suspect this would also succumb to muscle memory What about up on the overhead panel where the other engine start controls are? Or (at the cost of complexity) you could interlock with the throttle lever so that you can't flip the cutoff if the lever isn't a…

> How about actual switch covers (and switches that are not located right in the same area as stuff you are using routinely) instead of a glorified detent? Though I suspect this would also succumb to muscle memory

The switches are already pretty distinct - but that only reduces failures, it can never eliminate them entirely.

> Or (at the cost of complexity) you could interlock with the throttle lever so that you can't flip the cutoff if the lever isn't at idle

More complexity also means more failure modes. You don't want it to be impossible to shut down the engines due to a broken throttle sensor.

Re: Preliminary report into Air India crash released

#894

Post by account42 »

justsid wrote: post #631
zamadatix wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Sent into terrain in seconds by flipping a switch" is both too inaccurate and feels too cursory to take as impetus for serious design criticism, especially when the extensive preliminary report explicitly does not recommend any design changes with the current information.

Hilarious how Hacker News routinely bashes software managers who don’t understand a problem space and give vague and impossible goals. But somehow “just don’t let an aircraft fly itself into the ground” is a reasonable statement.

Is this Hacker News person in the room with us right now?

Re: Preliminary report into Air India crash released

#895

Post by account42 »

bravesoul2 wrote: post #521
energy123 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want you to guess how many traffic accidents are caused by accidentally reversing when you intended to go forward. Test your mental model against the real world. This is your opportunity.

Driving isn't trained to anywhere near the same standard. Probably more training required to bake a cake than drive a car (hours wise). If we had your typical driver fly a plane we'd be doomed to a lot of crashes.

I have baked cakes without ever been trained for it.

Re: Preliminary report into Air India crash released

#896

Post by account42 »

seedless-sensat wrote: post #557
1over137 wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that "nothing like" though? You are saying they are in different places, ok, but are they similar in other ways? Are both controls the same shape? size? colour? texture?

The landing great lever is shaped like a wheel as a design affordance. It would be VERY hard to confuse

Very hard to confuse if you are thinking about it. Doesn't say anything about the possibility of an action slip.

Re: Preliminary report into Air India crash released

#897

Post by account42 »

bonoboTP wrote: post #577
dubcanada wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No neither black box stores video. One stores audio on flash memory and the other stores flight details, sensors etc. I don’t think video is a bad idea. I assume there is a reason why it wasn’t done. Data wise black boxes actually store very little data (maybe a 100mbs), I don’t know if that is due to how old they are, or the requirements of withstanding extremes.

In the US, the NTSB has been recommending it for over 20 years. The pilot unions have been blocking it, due to privacy and other things. I'm not in aviation. But my between-the-lines straightforward reading is that unions see it as something with downsides (legal liability) but not much upside. It could be that there are a million tiny regulations that are known by everyone to be nonsensical, perhaps contradictory or…

> The answer cannot be 24/7 full-blown totalitarian surveillance state on everyone.

Surveillance is actually pretty common in many high-risk environments. And piloting is very much not just any other job but an exceedingly rare situation where the lives of hundreds of people are in the hands of only two people without anyone else being able to do anything to influence the outcome.

That pilot unions don't want surveillance is to be expected (the union is there to act in the pilots interest) but ultimately it isn't just up to them.

> Should we also put bodycam on all medical doctors and record all surgeries and all interactions?

Yes. We are finally starting to do so for police. These are all situations where an individual or very small team has direct control over the life of others who can't defend themselves.

Re: Preliminary report into Air India crash released

#898

Post by account42 »

sokoloff wrote: post #560
superasn wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why something so important isn't included. Heck they can make a back up directly to the cloud in addition to black box considering I'm able to watch YouTube in some flights nowadays.

ALPA (pilot union) has consistently objected to cockpit video recording. I believe other pilot unions have a generally similar stance.

So? Those unions act in the interests of pilots so that is to be expected. That doesn't mean that a regulator should be swayed by their objections.

Re: Preliminary report into Air India crash released

#899

Post by chmod775 »

account42 wrote: post #894
justsid wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hilarious how Hacker News routinely bashes software managers who don’t understand a problem space and give vague and impossible goals. But somehow “just don’t let an aircraft fly itself into the ground” is a reasonable statement.

Is this Hacker News person in the room with us right now?

Are we in a room together?

Re: Preliminary report into Air India crash released

#900

Post by ksajh »

upcoming-sesame wrote: post #537
UltraSane wrote: post #414

Video would definitively show whether either pilot moved these switches or if some other mechanism caused the movement. The aviation industry has consistently resisted cockpit video recording despite decades of available technology. The pilot unions argue privacy concerns, but cases like this demonstrate the value it would have. Current audio captured the pilots' denials, but without visual confirmation we may never…

Is this really the reason they object video recording in the cockpit ? If so I agree it's not a good enough reason.

Its more about concerns about Airlines using video to micro-manage pilots. I too would hate it if my manager was watching my every move while working so I can empathize.
Post reply on HN