7 ms·

Many aviation enthusiasts / pilots first go to is to have a look at the flight data - usually available on FlightAware / FlightRadar24 and a few other websites,

by _s 8y ago

Many aviation enthusiasts / pilots first go to is to have a look at the flight data - usually available on FlightAware / FlightRadar24 and a few other websites, plus LiveATC usually can provide recordings of the flights communications to towers as well. Most immediately saw parallels with the Lion Air crash - but as always, we as laymen should refrain from coming to conclusions until after a thorough investigation has been completed. The fleet has been grounded, and reports / data will slowly trickle out as more conclusions are made.

nonbel 8y ago
> "we as laymen should refrain from coming to conclusions until after a thorough investigation has been completed" People say this, but why? It seems to go against human nature. People love to speculate based on limited information and/or understanding.
- ceejayoz 8y ago
  Speculation is fine. Concluding things off it is not.
  - nonbel 8y ago
    That is true. I didn't read carefully enough.
- twblalock 8y ago
  > People say this, but why? It seems to go against human nature. People love to speculate based on limited information and/or understanding. We should resist that part of our nature. It is not rational.
  - nonbel 8y ago
    Not saying I disagree (I tend to favor rational behavior myself), but this sounds like a dogma. What evidence is there that only acting rationally is "better"?
- _s 8y ago
  Many reasons - the main one being drawing improper conclusions from the minimal data set available and passing them around as factually correct. Speculation is fine, it's when someone is on Fox News as an Aviation "Expert" claiming that the plane was struck by an angry Zeus's lightning bolt, which many segments of the population will believe, that's when we have problems.
- dwetterau 8y ago
  Here's one example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunil_Tripathi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunil_Tripathi Being skeptical and keeping onself safe is fine, but things can go wrong if people are trying to falsely act like experts.
  - buran77 8y ago
    Sometimes even experts have a hard time distinguishing between relevant and irrelevant facts. Let alone normal people with no formal training in the field, no practice, and no evidence.
  - system2 8y ago
    I blame reddit for this one.
_verandaguy 8y ago
To be clear, Flightradar24 and other ADS-B-based online services do not provide enough data to come to a meaningful conclusion about these kinds of accident. The resolution is often too coarse to even see how quickly a plane would've pitched down, assuming it did so quickly.
- Scoundreller 8y ago
  So they not provide? Not collected? Or is this kind of data not even broadcast in the first place?
  - blackflame7000 8y ago
    This data is actually gathered by hobbyist and you can be a part of their network all it costs is about $25 for an ADS-B USB adapter. https://www.flightradar24.com/build-your-own https://www.flightradar24.com/build-your-own They also offer free membership (499/yr) if you share data. Every flight broadcasts this data kinda like GPS and all you need is an antenna to receive it. In fact the tracking is basically done via ground-based GPS(ADS-B) by measuring the time delays between different receivers in the vicinity. The problem is that there aren't many hobbyists in those parts of Africa so coverage is sparse. In America, its pretty spot on in most locations. A USB adapter can surprisingly pick up planes as far away as 400 miles.
    - semi-extrinsic 8y ago
      If someone wants to do this, for the more technical audience there is a selection of better (but still pretty cheap) hardware available e.g. from https://www.rtl-sdr.com/buy-rtl-sdr-dvb-t-dongles/ https://www.rtl-sdr.com/buy-rtl-sdr-dvb-t-dongles/ E.g. you can get an SDR with built-in ADS-B specific low-noise amplifier and SAW filter also for $25. (This can't do general purpose stuff though, unlike the one linked by parent.) Or you can get their general-purpose SDR and their broadband LNA for $40 total.
    - Scoundreller 8y ago
      So I guess the newly released satellite data was because nobody was running (enough of) these dongles where these incidents occurred?
rootusrootus 8y ago
It is/was a real stretch to draw any parallels based on the amount of ADS-B data we got out of FR24. The plane went out of range of the nearest FR24 ADS-B receiver just a few minutes after taking off. People see what they want to see. It sure is an impatient world we live in. Probably attributable to the Internet, our insatiable need for more information NOW. Everyone ripping on the FAA for not making a grounding decision until yesterday, even though the crash itself happened just four days ago.
- duado 8y ago
  I rip the FAA for that. The level of air safety we have is because we have traditionally protected it fiercely. Within minutes of the second plane going down, the type should have been grounded until the FAA could figure out whether they were related. If not, they can unground them later.
  - rootusrootus 8y ago
    There is a good reason we teach kids the allegory about the boy who cried wolf. If the FAA panics that easily they will destroy their creditability just as quickly as if they take too long. If they really did get new evidence yesterday and it prompted their decision, then I think they deserve more credit than the other world agencies that freaked out in a matter of hours. I want our regulators to be cold and analytical.
    - dragontamer 8y ago
      I agree. I have qualms about the process, but I'm always nitpicky about various things. Boeing was far too involved in this decision matter IMO for example, but that's mostly an issue of optics. Overall, I'm pretty happy with what I saw out of the FAA. It just seems like the FAA may have gotten the data last. Canada got it before we did. The EU got the blackbox first, so once they looked at the data, they banned the plane. China's response may have been preemptive, since there's no way they could have looked through the data at that speed. Perhaps we should be pissed off at getting the data-last. But that's hardly the FAA's fault (maybe a State-department thing). In the future, Boeing needs to at least appear more neutral and less like a lobbyist when these events occur. There's significant distrust in our system these days, our regulators need to understand what it looks like when they're talking with the companies who make the plane before getting the black box...

by _s 8y ago

nonbel 8y ago

> "we as laymen should refrain from coming to conclusions until after a thorough investigation has been completed" People say this, but why? It seems to go against human nature. People love to speculate based on limited information and/or understanding.

ceejayoz 8y ago
Speculation is fine. Concluding things off it is not.
- nonbel 8y ago
  That is true. I didn't read carefully enough.
twblalock 8y ago
> People say this, but why? It seems to go against human nature. People love to speculate based on limited information and/or understanding. We should resist that part of our nature. It is not rational.
- nonbel 8y ago
  Not saying I disagree (I tend to favor rational behavior myself), but this sounds like a dogma. What evidence is there that only acting rationally is "better"?
_s 8y ago
Many reasons - the main one being drawing improper conclusions from the minimal data set available and passing them around as factually correct. Speculation is fine, it's when someone is on Fox News as an Aviation "Expert" claiming that the plane was struck by an angry Zeus's lightning bolt, which many segments of the population will believe, that's when we have problems.
dwetterau 8y ago
Here's one example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunil_Tripathi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunil_Tripathi Being skeptical and keeping onself safe is fine, but things can go wrong if people are trying to falsely act like experts.
- buran77 8y ago
  Sometimes even experts have a hard time distinguishing between relevant and irrelevant facts. Let alone normal people with no formal training in the field, no practice, and no evidence.
- system2 8y ago
  I blame reddit for this one.

_verandaguy 8y ago

To be clear, Flightradar24 and other ADS-B-based online services do not provide enough data to come to a meaningful conclusion about these kinds of accident. The resolution is often too coarse to even see how quickly a plane would've pitched down, assuming it did so quickly.

Scoundreller 8y ago
So they not provide? Not collected? Or is this kind of data not even broadcast in the first place?
- blackflame7000 8y ago
  This data is actually gathered by hobbyist and you can be a part of their network all it costs is about $25 for an ADS-B USB adapter. https://www.flightradar24.com/build-your-own https://www.flightradar24.com/build-your-own They also offer free membership (499/yr) if you share data. Every flight broadcasts this data kinda like GPS and all you need is an antenna to receive it. In fact the tracking is basically done via ground-based GPS(ADS-B) by measuring the time delays between different receivers in the vicinity. The problem is that there aren't many hobbyists in those parts of Africa so coverage is sparse. In America, its pretty spot on in most locations. A USB adapter can surprisingly pick up planes as far away as 400 miles.
  - semi-extrinsic 8y ago
    If someone wants to do this, for the more technical audience there is a selection of better (but still pretty cheap) hardware available e.g. from https://www.rtl-sdr.com/buy-rtl-sdr-dvb-t-dongles/ https://www.rtl-sdr.com/buy-rtl-sdr-dvb-t-dongles/ E.g. you can get an SDR with built-in ADS-B specific low-noise amplifier and SAW filter also for $25. (This can't do general purpose stuff though, unlike the one linked by parent.) Or you can get their general-purpose SDR and their broadband LNA for $40 total.
  - Scoundreller 8y ago
    So I guess the newly released satellite data was because nobody was running (enough of) these dongles where these incidents occurred?

rootusrootus 8y ago

It is/was a real stretch to draw any parallels based on the amount of ADS-B data we got out of FR24. The plane went out of range of the nearest FR24 ADS-B receiver just a few minutes after taking off. People see what they want to see. It sure is an impatient world we live in. Probably attributable to the Internet, our insatiable need for more information NOW. Everyone ripping on the FAA for not making a grounding decision until yesterday, even though the crash itself happened just four days ago.

duado 8y ago
I rip the FAA for that. The level of air safety we have is because we have traditionally protected it fiercely. Within minutes of the second plane going down, the type should have been grounded until the FAA could figure out whether they were related. If not, they can unground them later.
- rootusrootus 8y ago
  There is a good reason we teach kids the allegory about the boy who cried wolf. If the FAA panics that easily they will destroy their creditability just as quickly as if they take too long. If they really did get new evidence yesterday and it prompted their decision, then I think they deserve more credit than the other world agencies that freaked out in a matter of hours. I want our regulators to be cold and analytical.
  - dragontamer 8y ago
    I agree. I have qualms about the process, but I'm always nitpicky about various things. Boeing was far too involved in this decision matter IMO for example, but that's mostly an issue of optics. Overall, I'm pretty happy with what I saw out of the FAA. It just seems like the FAA may have gotten the data last. Canada got it before we did. The EU got the blackbox first, so once they looked at the data, they banned the plane. China's response may have been preemptive, since there's no way they could have looked through the data at that speed. Perhaps we should be pissed off at getting the data-last. But that's hardly the FAA's fault (maybe a State-department thing). In the future, Boeing needs to at least appear more neutral and less like a lobbyist when these events occur. There's significant distrust in our system these days, our regulators need to understand what it looks like when they're talking with the companies who make the plane before getting the black box...