4 ms·

> This sucks but it is not that big of a deal Not this time, thankfully. But it could have severely injured or even killed someone in / under the bridge at th

> This sucks but it is not that big of a deal Not this time, thankfully. But it could have severely injured or even killed someone in / under the bridge at the time of failure. Especially if they were transitioning between the plane and the bridge.

wongarsu 3y ago
If you stand below without a hardhat (as the people in the picture) you might be hit by the falling door or the airbridge itself. That might be bad. For passengers this doesn't look particularly dangerous though. From the picture s it look like a 2 meter/6 feet fall onto concrete. Unprepared, but feet first. Sure you can die from that if you are uncoordinated and somewhat frail (e.g. suffering from osteoporosis), but most people would get away from that with a couple scratches on their hands and knees.
- CoastalCoder 3y ago
  I could be mistaken, but I think the following are also possible: (a) While crossing the threshold, head trauma from the bar(s) that support the flexible ceiling of the bridge. (b) While crossing the threshold, pinned and crushed by that bar. I.e., half of their body is inside the plane, the other half is holding up the bridge via that bar. (c) While crossing the threshold, a parent carrying a baby. Baby is ripped out of parent's arms, and falls 6-8 feet to the ground. Possibly head first. All are horrifying possibilities, which I don't believe would be fully remediated by post-incident insurance or maintenance.
  - dghlsakjg 3y ago
    This is all under the assumption that this was a sudden collapse while the jet-bridge was fully loaded with people. If the system just lost hydraulic pressure slowly during a non-loading time, its entirely possible that it took quite a while to collapse, and no one was near enough to do anything. The forces would be high, but there would be ample time for a human to move.
    - ciabattabread 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - wongarsu 3y ago
        I think there's a big difference between asserting that a very deadly event should have been less deadly, and arguing that an event where nobody was hurt in fact was fairly harmless and was unlikely to seriously hurt or kill anyone.
      - dghlsakjg 3y ago
        All I said was that rapid catastrophic failure is necessary for any of the injury mechanisms mentioned. Why the snarky comment?
blantonl 3y ago
A DFW Airport maintenance employee was killed after falling from a Jet Bridge back in 2015.
- NooneAtAll3 3y ago
  reminded me of Top Gear scene
- xaminmo 3y ago
  That would not happen here since it stayed pressed against the fuselage. Falling out of an open jetbridge unexpectedly has head injury written all over it. A failing / falling jetbridge has hydraulic slow descent vibes.
xaminmo 3y ago
They are hydraulic elevators. Failure falls are slow. There are exclusion zones under the bridge, and soneone inside would have to trip, fall, and hit their head to be at serious risk. Basically, failure modes for aviation related technology tries to take into account public risk.

wongarsu 3y ago

If you stand below without a hardhat (as the people in the picture) you might be hit by the falling door or the airbridge itself. That might be bad. For passengers this doesn't look particularly dangerous though. From the picture s it look like a 2 meter/6 feet fall onto concrete. Unprepared, but feet first. Sure you can die from that if you are uncoordinated and somewhat frail (e.g. suffering from osteoporosis), but most people would get away from that with a couple scratches on their hands and knees.

CoastalCoder 3y ago
I could be mistaken, but I think the following are also possible: (a) While crossing the threshold, head trauma from the bar(s) that support the flexible ceiling of the bridge. (b) While crossing the threshold, pinned and crushed by that bar. I.e., half of their body is inside the plane, the other half is holding up the bridge via that bar. (c) While crossing the threshold, a parent carrying a baby. Baby is ripped out of parent's arms, and falls 6-8 feet to the ground. Possibly head first. All are horrifying possibilities, which I don't believe would be fully remediated by post-incident insurance or maintenance.
- dghlsakjg 3y ago
  This is all under the assumption that this was a sudden collapse while the jet-bridge was fully loaded with people. If the system just lost hydraulic pressure slowly during a non-loading time, its entirely possible that it took quite a while to collapse, and no one was near enough to do anything. The forces would be high, but there would be ample time for a human to move.
  - ciabattabread 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - wongarsu 3y ago
      I think there's a big difference between asserting that a very deadly event should have been less deadly, and arguing that an event where nobody was hurt in fact was fairly harmless and was unlikely to seriously hurt or kill anyone.
    - dghlsakjg 3y ago
      All I said was that rapid catastrophic failure is necessary for any of the injury mechanisms mentioned. Why the snarky comment?

blantonl 3y ago

A DFW Airport maintenance employee was killed after falling from a Jet Bridge back in 2015.

NooneAtAll3 3y ago
reminded me of Top Gear scene
xaminmo 3y ago
That would not happen here since it stayed pressed against the fuselage. Falling out of an open jetbridge unexpectedly has head injury written all over it. A failing / falling jetbridge has hydraulic slow descent vibes.

xaminmo 3y ago

They are hydraulic elevators. Failure falls are slow. There are exclusion zones under the bridge, and soneone inside would have to trip, fall, and hit their head to be at serious risk. Basically, failure modes for aviation related technology tries to take into account public risk.