World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Apparently it lost all power which is rare. It’s in the USA too, that black box.
I have a curiosity though:
So it landed from the opposite way? Is that normal? Why are they so angry about the concrete barrier, if it was on the side where planes should approach from, and not at the opposite side where they land?
I understand the barrier caused the main fire etc. yes it’s horrible. I’m sorry for all those people. I wonder what the hell happened before it crash landed. Like if they were forced to come from opposite side instead of did the full go around or if it was pilots choice.
Dima's reply caught most of your questions.
They may have been losing power or thrust, or had another problem that basically told them "get on the ground ASAP". And this change in status could have happened after the go-around was initiated. Also if there is not a significant tailwind a plane can land from either direction. It was likely a number of factors that lead to this decision
Yes
Runway overruns happen from time to time. A concrete barrier in the overrun area is the equivalent of have a 90° curve on a motorway/highway with a reinforced wall beyond the curve. Bad design and destined for a fatal accident
To build on Dima's excellent reply, the majority of runways are designed to be approached from either direction. Runway numbers are assigned based on a clockwise 360° radial, dropping the first number. An airport with a runway oriented at 10° East of North would be Runway 1. This airport will have Runways 1 and 19, but they're be the same runway approached from the north or the south.
There's a few things that are weird about this particular incident. Even if there was a full loss of power (indicated by the FVR losing power) the landing gear can be deployed by gravity drop. If there was a full loss of thrust from the get-go, they wouldn't have attempted a go-around. Here's my armchair hypothesis:
Bird strike. Loss of thrust on an engine, possible warnings to shut down the engine. Mayday mayday mayday. Attempted landing (full of fuel, likely overweight) comes in too fast or too high, or both. Go-around initiated. During climb, loss of power in second engine, but still some thrust. Announce intention to land on opposite runway. Decide to wait as long as possible to deploy landing gear in an attempt to increase glide slope. Second engine dies, total power loss. Complete task saturation means they don't/can't attempt a memory item dual engine failure checklist, which would include turning on the Auxiliary Power Unit or Ram Air Turbine to restore some power. (RAT should deploy automatically but perhaps it happened too fast to make a difference, also I'm guessing on the checklist, I'm not a pilot). Power loss means gear must be deployed manually. (Alternatively, with task saturation, they just forgot to deploy gear, and power loss was late and just another scoop on the shit Sunday they were served) Still coming in too high/fast, they touch down late, and overweight, and without braking action from the gear, and with no reverse thrust. They overshoot the end of the runway. For a belly landing, it was perfect. Wings level, no rolling, coming down the center line of the runway. Probably survivable for at least some. Then they hit a concrete barrier
The concrete barrier (a cinderblock wall) is at both ends of the runway. It goes all the way around the airport.
Yikes.
The RESA should absolutely have engineered arrest materials at the end of the runway. And breakaway towers for the ILS antenna
Runways can be used from either direction, usually they try to land with a headwind if there is significant wind I think. I think the localizer antenna can be at both ends of the runway if both directions have ILS approaches, but I'm not an expert. The concrete mound for the antenna is getting a lot of focus because it made a runway excursion so much worse.
It seems to me like they may have decided to make the landing then due to losing altitude and thinking they wouldn't be able to climb again, but hopefully the investigation can figure out what probably happened.
Accidentally cutting off fuel to the wrong engine after the bird strike, or possibly both engines, would mean no additional power to climb and do a proper go around.
And no engines running means no power, which would mean no flight data recorder since this plane predated required battery backups for that system.
Yeah, I think this is likely what happened, will be interesting to see what the investigation finds. I'm surprised there isn't any sort of backup power for the voice recorder, it's there to help investigate incidents, those 4 minutes would have contained a lot of vital insight into what was going on.