Live data from Hacker News

Midair Collision over Denver

avherald.com

91–100 of 237 posts

Re: Midair Collision over Denver

#91
post #62

Wow, that's incredible. Goes to show that people do walk away from plane crashes with some regularity. My father was a pilot[0]. He sold his plane about 15 years ago (to a group of owners, one of which was a priest, I'm sure there's a joke in there). A few of winters later, he was called out to Romeo Airport; the pilot flying the plane that was formerly his had crashed the aircraft a few miles short of the runway in…

In aviation load and range are always a compromise, you can fly short distance with a higher load (all passengers) or a longer distance with less passengers. The combined passenger weight and full tanks weight is always more than the Maximum Take Off Weigth (MTOW). For example the small plane that I fly the most has enough fuel capacity to fly around 2000km, but if I will the tanks I need to fly alone, there is no reserve even for a backpack. When I took my brother for a flight around the airstrip I had 20 liters of fuel in the tanks 'cause he is heavy (for an European).

I have a couple of friends that each crash landed at least twice in the past 10-15 years; one was in the hospital once, for the rest of the incidents they simply walked. In two cases it was engine failure, in one a stuck landing gear and the hospital one had an external factor.

Re: Midair Collision over Denver

#92
post #9

I find it slightly incredible that two planes ever hit each other given the size of planes compared to the volume of space they fly in. I understand that it's simple probability (small planes, big volume, but lots of flights) but it's still amazing that it happens at all.

"Big Sky Theory" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_sky_theory >In aviation, the Big Sky Theory is that two randomly flying bodies are very unlikely to collide, as the three-dimensional space is so large relative to the bodies. Some aviation safety rules involving altimetry and navigation standards are based on this concept. It does not apply when aircraft are flying along specific narrow routes, such as an airport tr…

The problem is that the theory mostly works. "See and avoid" ends up mostly depending on the good odds a lot of the time. Except when it doesn't as in this case.

Re: Midair Collision over Denver

#93
post #62

Wow, that's incredible. Goes to show that people do walk away from plane crashes with some regularity. My father was a pilot[0]. He sold his plane about 15 years ago (to a group of owners, one of which was a priest, I'm sure there's a joke in there). A few of winters later, he was called out to Romeo Airport; the pilot flying the plane that was formerly his had crashed the aircraft a few miles short of the runway in…

Did his wife survive?

Re: Midair Collision over Denver

#94
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more generic system is called BRS, Ballistic Recovery Systems. They deliver this as an option for many small aircraft and it's popular for experimental / home built aircraft. One downside of the systems is that they typically have a maximum lifespan of 10 years while airframes last 50+ years. So every 10 years there is a large maintenance cost to replace/renew the parachute system. Much less an issue for a $ 800k…

Am I correct in saying after one usage, the parachute system generally needs replaced? I think I read this about Cirrus planes anyway

Yes. The parachute has a pyrotechnic deployment mechanism that is consumed; I never saw a BRS sold in separate components, so you need to replace the entire package. The 10 year shelf life is coming from the pyrotechnic charge and the parachute material, they both age.

Re: Midair Collision over Denver

#95
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more generic system is called BRS, Ballistic Recovery Systems. They deliver this as an option for many small aircraft and it's popular for experimental / home built aircraft. One downside of the systems is that they typically have a maximum lifespan of 10 years while airframes last 50+ years. So every 10 years there is a large maintenance cost to replace/renew the parachute system. Much less an issue for a $ 800k…

Am I correct in saying after one usage, the parachute system generally needs replaced? I think I read this about Cirrus planes anyway

[deleted]

Re: Midair Collision over Denver

#96

Glad no one was injured or killed. Sounds like the Metroliner pilot did very well. I really think that we should not have flying cars until we have true autopilot (hands off the wheel, meatbag!). The thought of the "Hey y'all! Lookit this!" knuckleheads that regularly open up, roaring past my house, in three dimensions, is chilling. They are bad enough with just two. I'll bet that the advent of true driverless tech w…

Reality is that you won't have the type of idiots that roar past your house flying cars/planes or anything of that nature unless it is fully automated because most of them aren't smart enough to pass the tests required to be a pilot.

Re: Midair Collision over Denver

#97
post #21

I was camping near Whistler a few years ago and heard a bang. Looked up and saw falling debris and bodies. A wing landed not far from our campsite. Turns out a glider (low-wing monoplane) was descending and the tow plane (high wing monoplane) was climbing. They were each in each other's blind spots :( Glad to see no fatalities here; I'm an aerospace engineer in the field of airworthiness and technical risk management…

Probably this:

* https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pemberton-b-...

Whenever there is a collision involving light aircraft the question of anti-collision systems comes up. Unfortunately the powers that be have completely failed to come up with a workable standard for such aircraft. The glider people eventually just gave up on waiting and now use a proprietary system called FLARM which has fairly good adoption. There is more than one system of that type available for light powered aircraft with not very good adoption. Each system is entirely incompatible with each other, including the standardized ones used in heavy commercial aviation.

Re: Midair Collision over Denver

#98
post #28
post #2

ATC comms with visualization: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5tb2dVWJqc

The pilot is speaking about failed engine after the collision, like it is nothing. Fascinating. I'd be shouting something obscene in such a situation. For half an hour at least, I think.

Trusted his training. Very good pilot.

Re: Midair Collision over Denver

#99
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My less charitable reading was that the pilot abandoned the Cirrus on a parachute, but then it seemed like the plane landed…

Pilots of planes with CAPS are (now) taught to pull the chute if anything goes wrong inside the profile (low enough speed, far enough above ground) where the chute is designed to work. The aeroplane is insured, you can buy a new one. Even if the pilot and all passengers are insured you can't buy new ones. They changed this because it turns out that the same phenomenon that leads to private pilots taking undue risks i…

I’m not really sure how to ask what I want to ask, so apologies if this doesn’t make sense: Does the parachute only work if the plane is in a free fall? If the plane is gliding along and suddenly the engine goes out, for example, would pulling the chute work?

Re: Midair Collision over Denver

#100
post #9

I find it slightly incredible that two planes ever hit each other given the size of planes compared to the volume of space they fly in. I understand that it's simple probability (small planes, big volume, but lots of flights) but it's still amazing that it happens at all.

In free flight, two aircraft can be anywhere in 3D space and collisions are rare.

Around takeoff and landing - there is effectively a 1D track for the approach and the climb-out. It's not quite that simple because different aircraft will have different descent profiles and different angles to the wind, but it's a much smaller 'search space' for collisions.

Post reply on HN