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

Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

viewfromthewing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 372 posts

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#91

Post by ajross »

hn_user2 wrote: post #43

For those thinking about preventative solutions, there are some existing, all very expensive of course. The simplest is placing a row of red lights in the ground at all intersections to runways. When an airplane is cleared for takeoff and until it is airborne the controller presses a button and turns all these lights red. Pilots are instructed that regardless of clearance, a red light over-rides that, and to never cr…

> For those thinking about preventative solutions, there are some existing, all very expensive of course. The simplest is placing a row of red lights in the ground at all intersections to runways.

That's... a street light.[1] When street lights become "very expensive of course" it's time to revisit our priors about how we regulate. And I say this as someone not normally inclined to libertarian rhetoric.

[1] To be clear: a proven and effective technology deployed successfully literally millions of times over the past century of traffic control!

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#92

Post by eliseumds »

LarryMullins wrote: post #90
jaboutboul wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s definitely on there

Oh you're right. The tweet linked in the article doesn't have it but this version does: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N1gDSZJ5s0 vs https://twitter.com/RossFeinstein/status/1614613794470100995

The tweet has it as well, at 5s of the second attached video: https://twitter.com/xJonNYC/status/1614370783899303938/video...

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#93

Post by gregmac »

ars wrote: post #79
Dalewyn wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Manufacturing certifications, installation and maintenance inspections and certifications, auditing, etc. To put it into some relatable context, a simple electrical switch that you might grab for a few bucks at your local Home Depot would cost at least several hundreds of dollars because of all the red tape that must be satisfied for safety reasons. Safety isn't cheap.

The extra cost for safety is reducing safety because it's causing this not to get installed. Maybe it's worth having a worse system that actually is there.

If this system fails when needed, every cent spent on it will be considered a waste. Nobody is going to say "sure, 300 people died and a couple $150m planes were destroyed.. but we saved a couple million dollars when it was installed 7 years ago".

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#94

Post by harshreality »

hn_user2 wrote: post #43

For those thinking about preventative solutions, there are some existing, all very expensive of course. The simplest is placing a row of red lights in the ground at all intersections to runways. When an airplane is cleared for takeoff and until it is airborne the controller presses a button and turns all these lights red. Pilots are instructed that regardless of clearance, a red light over-rides that, and to never cr…

Beyond detecting runway incursions, couldn't ASDE be integrated with some kind of RTS-like interface for ATC so they could indicate where planes should go next? Automated alerts could be broadcast to ATC and to the pilots if planes deviated from the plan, and the system could flag actions that risked costly but non-fatal ground collisions and other problems unrelated to takeoffs or landings.

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#95

Post by BoorishBears »

sokoloff wrote: post #88
sonofhans wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the other answers are getting at the meat of it. Consider that those red lights functioning is the only thing keeping hundreds or thousands of people from getting killed. What sorts of safety and durability requirements would you impose on them? What sorts of maintenance and training requirements? If nothing else they need to hold up in every weather and temperature big airports exist (-80ºF to +150ºF)…

These lights would not be the only thing keeping hundreds from being killed. ATC clearances over the radio are the primary thing; this is a secondary system.

That's an example of why they're expensive: they need to be engineered as if one day they might be.

And no one chooses when or where that is

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#96

Post by Havoc »

LarryMullins wrote: post #86

> (“Shit! Delta 1943 cancel takeoff clearance!”) This isn't a real quote, is it? I was surprised to read ATC losing their composure like that, but in the linked video/audio there is no utterance of Shit! that I can hear.

There is a very loud and clear “shit” in the actual atc stream

It was very very close so monetary lapse in composure isn’t entirely unexpected

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#97

Post by plusminusplus »

m_a_g wrote: post #13

> strong kudos are due both to the air traffic controller who called off the Delta 737 and to the pilots of that plane who managed to abort their takeoff and stop the aircraft before it crossed runway 31L where the Boeing widebody passed in front of it Can't agree more

How difficult is it to stop an aircraft like that so quickly? More than yanking an emergency brake handle I'm assuming.

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#98

Post by lelandfe »

Symbiote wrote: post #67
christophilus wrote: post #48

The animation in the tweet at the end of the article is something. Based on that, the deceleration looked remarkably fast. I imagine that was quite the ride for the folks in the Delta jet.

I've experienced maximum breaking in an emergency landing. Many passengers (including me) instinctively put their hands on the seat in front to steady themselves. You could easily slide around if the seat belt were loose. It was it worst for children whose legs didn't reach the floor, but there were none seated near me.

I was on a plane that had engine issues during takeoff, front wheel off the ground. We slammed back down to earth and likewise they braked harder than I'd ever experienced. Lady's phone flew out of her hand. It was intense.

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#99

Post by JimtheCoder »

Sharlin wrote: post #59
scyzoryk_xyz wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that there is a shit ton that is and always has been happening in this area. Air safety is the leading sector in standards for safety training. We are relying on checklists, procedures, surveillance tech, simulation training, certification, re-certification etc. etc. No other industry has put in as much thought into these problems. Except for maybe the military. Source: I had the opportunity to me…

The reason surgery is so far behind aeronautics is likely entirely due to the fact that when a surgery goes wrong, it usually doesn't kill hundreds of people at once in a massive fireball. Everything else being equal, rare but spectacular failures tend to garner more attention than more frequent but less dramatic ones.

"The reason surgery is so far behind aeronautics is likely entirely due to the fact that when a surgery goes wrong, it usually doesn't kill hundreds of people at once in a massive fireball."

You also have to wonder how many deaths from surgery are officially classified as "Doctors messed up" vs something else that partially or fully absolves them from responsibility...

Re: Friday night’s near-disaster at JFK airport

#100

Post by chazeon »

christophilus wrote: post #48

The animation in the tweet at the end of the article is something. Based on that, the deceleration looked remarkably fast. I imagine that was quite the ride for the folks in the Delta jet.

True, this animation clearly reminds me of [Tenerife airport disaster][1], a childhood nightmare from a documentary. 10s late it could became that.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenerife_airport_disaster

Post reply on HN