11 ms·
It also looks like a wing has been ripped off. That passengers could survive an accident involving so much force is surprising.
by RachelF 2y ago
It also looks like a wing has been ripped off. That passengers could survive an accident involving so much force is surprising.
- chrisco255 2y agoDid it roll after landing or before landing?
- hinkley 2y agoThe fact that people lived suggests after.
- alistairSH 2y agoI saw a report that it was after touchdown. I’m guessing wind, ice, or something else moved the plane off the centerline and into a crab, it hooked a wheel off the pavement, and cartwheeled. 100% conjecture at this point, just seems like a possible chain of events.
- voisin 2y agoToronto Pearson had wind gusts of 60km/h today. Edit: listing to the ATC audio I think they said gusts in the 30s (man do they ever speak fast and mumble! Enunciate damn it! Unique New York), which is markedly slower than what the Apple Weather app reported for Pearson.
- petschge 2y agoRemember that ATC will give wind speeds in knots, not km/h.
- voisin 2y agoDoh! My mistake. Thanks for pointing that out
- shazeline 2y agoIt was gusting at 33kts. 33kt/hr * 1.15mi/kt * 1.609km/mi ~= 61km/hr. The weather app was right. Just different units.
- voisin 2y agoWhoops of course! My mistake
- WalterBright 2y agoToo bad the airport couldn't find the funds to put a dash cam in the tower. Grump grump grump.
- loloquwowndueo 2y agoThey have the video, they’re just not in a rush to release it to grumps like you :)
- WalterBright 2y agoWe'll see. How come we never see tower video of other crashes?
- throwup238 2y agoBecause the press doesn’t publicize NTSB reports months after the crash. It doesn’t have the same sensational draw to earn clicks. Look up the NTSB docket management system where they release all the reports (just be aware that they list photos as “Text/Image” but videos as “Other”).
- ceejayoz 2y agoWe do? https://people.com/new-video-dc-plane-crash-shows-final-seconds-before-collision-8784031 https://people.com/new-video-dc-plane-crash-shows-final-seco... was an airport camera, IIRC.
- WalterBright 2y agoThat clip was shot by an amatuer with a hand-held camera, it isn't an airport camera.
- ceejayoz 2y agoNo; this was the second to come out that night.
- DebtDeflation 2y agoAfter touchdown, but it rolled sideways not end over end. This kept the fuselage intact and ripped off the wings (where all the fuel is) which is why everyone survived.
- eastbound 2y agoJust to understand: Did it roll upside down, with people’s head at the bottom, or sideways, with people’s back to the front of the direction?
- cm2187 2y agoIt certainly ended up upside down.
- sangnoir 2y agoWhat you describe in the second sentence - rotating around the vertical-axis - is typically termed a spin . I think parent was saying the roll was along the planes' length rather than tail-over-nose, the latter usually result in the aircraft breaking up as the torque will be really high.
- FabHK 2y agoRotation around the - longitudinal axis: roll, controlled by ailerons. - vertical axis: yaw, controlled by rudder. - lateral axis (through the wings): pitch, controlled by elevators.
- sangnoir 2y agoThanks - those are correct terms for aircraft in flight, that don't apply to out-of-control vehicles on the ground. An airplane that loses traction and rotates about it's vertical axis is spinning, not yawing.
- account42 2y agoIn case you (or others confused) haven't seen it year, this video clearly shows the sideways roll: https://www.reddit.com/r/CatastrophicFailure/comments/1isabtg/a_clear_visual_of_delta_airlines_crashlanding_at/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CatastrophicFailure/comments/1isabt...
- wkat4242 2y agoTrue but I have a feeling it might be designed to rip off in this situation. I'm more surprised the wing rupture didn't cause a fire/explosion because this is where most of the fuel is stored.
- dotBen 2y agoPlanes typically land with little fuel left (obviously enough for emergencies etc but they are practically empty, it's safer and more efficient)
- nradov 2y agoThat's not really accurate. Commercial airliners typically land with significant reserve fuel remaining on board. If a post crash fire ignites and isn't rapidly put out then that reserve fuel will be plenty to destroy the aircraft and kill everyone who doesn't evacuate quickly. https://simpleflying.com/minimum-fuel-requirements-definitions-guide/ https://simpleflying.com/minimum-fuel-requirements-definitio...
- cperciva 2y agoLess than a full load certainly, but I wouldn't say "little fuel". 30 minutes fuel remaining is an automatic mayday call.
- sitharus 2y agoIn normal operation, an aeroplane lands with enough fuel for one go-around and re-attempt at landing at the chosen airport, plus enough for diversion to their alternate, plus an additional 30 minutes of flight. If an aircraft is anticipated to land with fuel for 30 minutes or less they must make a mayday call, and there's an incident report to fill in. Yes they want to land with as little fuel as possible, but regulations require them to carry more because we know what happens when you let airlines carry less.
- stouset 2y agoI seriously, seriously doubt it. The wings are so utterly critical to flight I can’t possibly imagine any situation they’d be engineered to snap off under. Further, that’s where the fuel is and any crash involving a wing rupture is dramatically more dangerous given the risk of fire. Hell even in a crash landing like this you want the plane to stay upright and stable.
- cm2187 2y agoNot only ripped off but if you look at the video it looks like the wings exploded with a ball of fire.
- gosub100 2y agoThat might have saved them, breaking the source of fuel away
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]