6 ms·
This is worthy of reporting. 50+ people were injured, one is in severe condition.
by notRobot 3y ago
This is worthy of reporting. 50+ people were injured, one is in severe condition.
- tptacek 3y agoFlight control incidents that cause injuries are not hard to find on avherald. I guess I'm not saying it isn't worth reporting. Before the Boeing Narrative set in, these kinds of stories did get reported! But now they're tied into this long-running Boeing arc, and it's frustrating because there isn't enough in the story to know what's really going on.
- CyberDildonics 3y agoIf you want to be a contrarian after a whistleblower is dead and 50 people were injured, maybe you should have some real data, stats or information instead of just saying "it happens all the time".
- 627467 3y agoMaybe what most people are truly concerned is the Boeing Narrative? Increasingly more than just a narrative
- tptacek 3y agoDo you know that or do you just feel it? If you know it, how do you know? Is that knowledge reflected in the reporting? If you camped avherald watching for incidents, and you had an inciting incident like the door plug (indisputably a major story!) to start from, could you create the same narrative for Bombardier? I think you could.
- 627467 3y agoDoes it matter? At this stage it's just ridiculous that there's no more uproar towards Boeing or even direct intervention into it. Maybe because it's one of the 2 disfuntional members of the duopoly at the foundation of global air transit with massive geopolitical consequences if major changes are suggested.
- tptacek 3y agoIt depends on whether you want to respond to stories like this with advocacy or understanding.
- andrewflnr 3y agoDefinitely both. You never really want to stop understanding, but understanding in public interest cases serves to inform advocacy, and any story can cross the evidence threshold where advocacy becomes the primary concern. I think we're there with Boeing.
- bluepizza 3y agoDid Bombardier have a scandal where cost cutting measures led to the crash of two aeroplanes and the loss of hundreds of lives?
- nsguy 3y agoDoes it sell more ads? Does it get more eyeballs? Do people click on the story? Does the writer get promoted? A bonus? Is this a conspiracy against Boeing? Is the owner of the newspaper short Boeing and long Airbus? (those last four questions are /s the first two maybe less so.) I used to laugh at those pushing "mainstream media" wild stories (e.g. from a certain portion of Americans) but Journalism isn't what it used to be, and maybe it was never what it used to be. I do think that focus on Boeing is somewhat warranted but it's a good question how do we get a real unbiased picture. Especially given that accidents are a low probability event and it's hard to determine what happens by chance, within reason, or is really reflecting something concerning that has to be addressed and how it should be addressed. Your average Journalist is lacking the training and tools to think about these things and they wouldn't even know who is the right expert and what is the right data to look at.
- avs733 3y agoWhether time proves that out - and whether 'more than a narrative' (meaning..safety culture) is actually related to this incident matter and are independent of it emerging as a narrative. A very similar thing happened post Air France 447's crash into the Atlantic ocean. The reporting on it began to include any incident involving any airbus plane for quite a while until it was determined the crew was primarily at fault. There was a narrative building simply because of our tendency in media to have extreme recency bias.
- 627467 3y agoAirbus has other types of disfuntions. It's ridiculous to consider the problems with Boeing started now: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX_groundings https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX_groundings https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Boeing_787_Dreamliner_grounding https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Boeing_787_Dreamliner_g...
- nsguy 3y agoIIRC there were other Airbus incidents and concerns. It's been so long I don't recall the details but I remember being worried about flying Airbus.
- bombcar 3y agoAirbus has had any number of incidents (here's one: https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/landing-with-nosewheels-at-90-degrees/ https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/landing-with-nosewheels-at-90... ) - and for awhile their approach to autopilots was widely argued back and forth (Airbus wouldn't let you put the plane outside of the envelope, basically), and there's some disagreement on how competing sticks should be handled.
- dotancohen 3y agoI love when I can read something and identify the guy who's been interested in the topic for decades.
- avs733 3y ago
- kulahan 3y agoCould you link a few with injuries anywhere near this size? I feel like that’d be national news, so it’s surprising to hear it’s happening often.
- BWStearns 3y agoNot a control issue but there was a Hawaiian flight that had 36 injuries from turbulence. Edit to add: it would be unsurprising if turbulence was the cause here and the passenger quoted had their facts wrong. https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/18/us/hawaiian-airlines-injuries-turbulence/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/18/us/hawaiian-airlines-injuries...
- nsguy 3y agoAn airplane doesn't suddenly drop out of the sky because its controls stops responding. So I agree that on the face of it it's either turbulence or some sort of aggressive manoeuvre, either initiated by the pilots accidentally or somehow initiated by the airplanes control systems, not simply "stopped responding to controls".
- BWStearns 3y agoYeah, I just started typing out a scenario where instruments blipping might do it and it started getting implausible several clauses in.
- orbital-decay 3y agohttps://avherald.com/h?article=51212eb5 https://avherald.com/h?article=51212eb5 https://avherald.com/h?article=515c54c7 https://avherald.com/h?article=515c54c7 https://avherald.com/h?article=5153c289 https://avherald.com/h?article=5153c289 https://avherald.com/h?article=514dd2cc https://avherald.com/h?article=514dd2cc https://avherald.com/h?article=51474192 https://avherald.com/h?article=51474192 https://avherald.com/h?article=50a9fa9f https://avherald.com/h?article=50a9fa9f https://avherald.com/h?article=512e34e3 https://avherald.com/h?article=512e34e3 Only three are "anywhere near", but you get the idea, that's just browsing the first page with the accident filter on.
- diputsmonro 3y agoMultiple whistleblowers have been raising concerns about Boeing safety and build quality issues for several years, so for you to say "so what, there have been issues on Boeing planes for several years" actually reinforces the "Boeing narrative". If there are multiple people on the inside raising alarm bells, there probably is some substance there. Finally the problems are getting big enough that they can't just be swept under the rug anymore.
- ryanisnan 3y agoI don't understand why people seem to be disregarding highly related facts and are ignoring the fundamental nature of how or why the facts are related. Correlation does not imply causation, but when the facts are of the same substance, additional concern is warranted.
- gopher_space 3y agoIt's hard to criticize a power structure your point of view depends on, so you get weird apologists for industry in general that pop up in conversations like these.
- whatshisface 3y agoThe funniest thing is that Boeing is barely industry, with all the two-way regulatory ties and of course the monopoly, it's like a nationalized company that just happens to be nominally owned by investors. The only ideology that Boeing makes look bad is the Soviet system! :-)
- Scoundreller 3y ago> it's like a nationalized company that just happens to be nominally owned by investors So like Embraer, Airbus, Bombardier and probably others?
- whatshisface 3y ago
- ajross 3y ago> Flight control incidents that cause injuries are not hard to find on avherald. Exactly. But the takeaway here is that "notable" and "newsworthy" are slightly different ideas, and the latter is more subjective. This is absolutely the effect of the "Boeing Narrative". If the media is faced with data like this[2] in the face of a frame that says "Aviation is extremely safe and getting safer every year", they'll likely skip over the outliers. If they need to sell articles into a market that knows "Boeing Planes are Unsafe", they're going to have a much harder time with that notability analysis. And that's 100% on Boeing, not the media. At the end of the day if your business depends on people believing your products are good products[1], cutting corners on the reality undergirding that perception is a disaster. Boeing had almost a full century of goodwill they've now flushed. [1] Which is true for almost every business where the consumer sees the competition. Maybe not if you manufacture gaskets or capacitors, but airplanes and laptops for sure. [2] Editted to add: it also hands out an easy scapegoat. We really don't know if there was an instrument failure here or if it was pilot culpability. We just know what the pilot said. And we have to recognize that the pilot might have lied knowing that Boeing made an easier target.
- shadowgovt 3y agoEspecially given that the Bayesian numbers are that most incidents (especially long haul) will happen on Boeing frames purely because Boeing is everywhere.
- inferiorhuman 3y ago> Flight control incidents that cause injuries are not hard to find on avherald. No they're not. Flight control issues happen, turbulence happens, flight control issues that cause injuries are quite rare.
- CyberDildonics 3y ago[flagged]
- Log_out_ 3y agoPerfectly good diesel engines and the carbon dioxide they saved with these cars. Madness, pure madness. Should have just ignored the scandal to protect the local car industry..
- stouset 3y agoWorse, we’re only given a passenger’s recollection of what a pilot said. Which is of basically zero value. I’m reminded of another thread on this site a few months back. One commenter talked about an incident where their flight circled in a holding pattern unable to land for whatever reason. The pilot got on the PA and informed the passengers that they might have to divert as they about 30 minutes of fuel. Around half an hour later, the plane made a desperate run for a nearby airport. As the story was told, all the flight attendants were white as ghosts. The plane’s engines ran out of gas and shut off, but to the commenter’s existential relief they managed to just make it to the runway. Of course this is ridiculous. The pilot’s announcement was either grossly misunderstood or very poorly chosen. The plane had plenty of fuel, they had thirty minutes before they would be forced to divert, not thirty minutes total. No cockpit crew with functioning self-preservation instincts would patiently circle around a pattern while their plane inevitably runs out of gas. The engines didn’t run out of fuel; they were brought to idle or low for the descent just like every other landing. If the plane had truly run out of fuel, the cabin crew would have had the passengers brace for landing. There would have been emergency crews with flashing lights all along parallel taxiways. The plane would have come to a halt on the runway and been unable to taxi. An NTSB report would have been filed. The news would have reported on it. People replied pointing all of this out, but to my (probably faulty, after all, I’m an eyewitness) recollection they remained steadfast in their telling of events. And very timely, 737 Gear just published a video discussing Tucker Carlson’s retelling of an incident where his plane crashed[1]. By Tucker’s telling, there was an explosion and the wing broke off mid-flight. The plane crashed into the sand. In reality, the plane’s landing gear collapsed during landing. The plane rolled off the runway. In short, a passenger’s recall of stressful events is generally worse than useless. [1] https://youtu.be/dG-gXIY-GtA https://youtu.be/dG-gXIY-GtA
- kelnos 3y agoIt feels irresponsible to me to report some random thing a layperson passenger said without verifying the information. The passenger could have misheard or be lying. Even if the pilot did say that, he may have just said that to save face, when it was pilot error all along. Hopefully the FDR data will be made public.