[HN Gopher] Dropped iPad implicated in fatal Rotak Chinook helic...
___________________________________________________________________
Dropped iPad implicated in fatal Rotak Chinook helicopter crash
Author : mik3y
Score : 262 points
Date : 2023-07-14 14:44 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (verticalmag.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (verticalmag.com)
| [deleted]
| UnixSchizoid wrote:
| Was he possibly using it as a dashboard of sorts? Edit: I didn't
| read the article fully and was guessing, I have been corrected by
| the comments
| TMWNN wrote:
| The article itself discusses this:
|
| >Apple iPads and other so-called electronic flight bags (EFBs)
| have become common equipment in aircraft cockpits, used for
| flight planning, as a supplemental navigation aid, and to
| replace paper documents, among other purposes.
| UnixSchizoid wrote:
| ah, I didnt see that part. Thanks for that
| tiahura wrote:
| Didn't this happen on an Airbus at least once? I seem to remember
| hearing that pilot's iPhone got wedged behind the joystick and
| pushed the nose down until he could knock it loose.
| jaywalk wrote:
| There's not really anywhere for an iPhone to get wedged around
| the side stick on an Airbus.
| TT-392 wrote:
| I think that was a camera
| PuffinBlue wrote:
| It was an RAF Voyager (Airbus A-330) I think you are referring
| to and a DSLR camera (Nikon D5300) that became wedged as you
| say[0].
|
| The item didn't get knocked loose, it was the plane automation
| that saved the flight. The auto-pilot self-corrected and
| levelled off when it detected prolonged dangerous pitch down
| input[1].
|
| [0] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/service-
| inquiry-i... [1] Page 37 of
| https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
| nsonha wrote:
| > The auto-pilot self-corrected and levelled off when it
| detected prolonged dangerous pitch down input
|
| this makes Airbus the opposite of Boeing
| nayuki wrote:
| Mini Air Crash Investigation: How A Camera Sent This
| Passenger Jet Into A Terrifying NoseDive.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VGsnztTo4A
| Mawr wrote:
| Probably a better video from MentourPilot:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl-Fl66Jfao
| vorpalhex wrote:
| What an unfortunate accident. I'm surprised anything loose in the
| cabin isn't tethered in whether it's a tablet or a clipboard.
| nvy wrote:
| I used to be in military SAR and the powers that be required
| helo crews to keep their EFBs/iPads in a clip with suction
| mounts, similar to what you see in cars for phones.
|
| Those regs are well established. Whether these guys were
| following them remains to be determined.
| jmbwell wrote:
| Oof. Suction cups? I can already hear it coming loose and
| hitting the floorboards.
|
| I'd be pushing for something more robust like a clamp-
| on/bolt-on RAM mount or something. We put RAM mounts on
| forklifts for iPads and barcode scanners, and they're nigh
| indestructible.
| dharmab wrote:
| Suction cups are extremely secure when used correctly
| (clean flat smooth surfaces). GoPro advertises theirs as
| secure in a 150MPH wind when used correctly.
| brewdad wrote:
| I would hope they are something really robust like the
| suction cups used to move large pieces of glass around.
| Still seems like an odd choice given the variety of
| temperatures and pressures experienced in flight.
| dharmab wrote:
| The cockpits are environmentally controlled- otherwise
| the equipment inside could overheat or freeze.
| nvy wrote:
| The mounts we used went through an airworthiness and crash
| survivability review. The ones I'm familiar with had dual
| suction cups and the cups themselves were pretty
| significant.
| dharmab wrote:
| A common checklist item is to secure any "FOD" (Foreign Object
| Debris"). For example some pilots will strap their clipboard or
| iPad to their legs as a "kneeboard".
| olliej wrote:
| Echoes of RAF Voyager ZZ333, where a camera jamming against a
| control caused an uncontrolled pitched down.
| BXLE_1-1-BitIs1 wrote:
| The Navpad is a simple device that secures gadgets to your thigh.
|
| https://www.diblasi.com/aviation.htm
|
| Stuff gets dropped. Suction cup mounts have the habit of coming
| loose at inopportune times.
| jollofricepeas wrote:
| That's sad. I can only imagine the amount of panic they must have
| went through.
|
| I wonder what other fatal accidents have been caused by dropped
| electronics such as iPads and iPhones getting stuck under
| accelerators and brake pedals in cars and long haul trucks as an
| example.
|
| There's obviously distracted driving as well which is a major
| problem.
| sirshmooey wrote:
| Tangentially related, there's Eastern Air Lines Flight 401. The
| flight crew unwittingly crashed the plane while preoccupied
| with a burnt out landing gear confirmation light.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Air_Lines_Flight_401
| criddell wrote:
| I flew recently and part of the pre-flight announcement now is
| if you drop a phone or other electronic device between seats,
| do not try to retrieve it. Call a flight attendant and let them
| retrieve it.
|
| Apparently, people have dropped their phone then while trying
| to retrieve it, moved the seat and bent the phone, puncturing
| the battery.
| Edd314159 wrote:
| I did this a few years ago during taxi before take-off, in a
| business class seat on a flight to Tokyo (I'm not bragging,
| it's literally the only time in my life I've ever not flown
| economy)
|
| I had to move to another seat when I wanted to recline it for
| sleeping, because the crew (quite rightly) didn't want my
| iPhone getting chewed up in the mechanism.
|
| Despite me using my Apple Watch to make the "find me!" ping
| sound, nobody could find it during the flight, so they had to
| partly dismantle the seat when we landed. It was all very
| embarrassing, I had to stand there for 20 minutes watching
| ground crew take it apart.
|
| I didn't dare tell anyone that I didn't turn it onto airplane
| mode before I dropped it.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| Don't feel bad. I once almost superglued my hand to a seat
| while deplaning.
|
| (And partly superglued my pants to my leg).
|
| Pressure changes have interesting impacts on "sealed"
| containers!
| jacquesm wrote:
| Imagine walking around for a while with a Lego 2x4 glued
| to your palm... not that I would know anything about
| that.
| ghaff wrote:
| While the consequences are less severe, losing them in the
| seat is one reason I absolutely will not use wireless
| earphones when flying. I did drop a phone once into a seat
| but the flight attendant was able to recover it.
|
| > didn't dare tell anyone that I didn't turn it onto
| airplane mode before I dropped it.
|
| I try to remember if only to preserve battery life but I'm
| willing to bet the vast majority of people don't.
| cjrp wrote:
| My wife dropped her engagement ring in to a China
| Airlines seat. Luckily, since it was a flight to Taiwan,
| we were able to use chopsticks to retrieve the ring from
| inside the seat!
| edgineer wrote:
| In this case it was not the attempt to retrieve the tablet
| that caused the accident, it was being unable to reach it to
| remove it from being jammed in the pedals.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| In most cases with highly trained professionals, panic is very
| unlikely. Too busy working the problem in front of them to
| panic.
| interestica wrote:
| > I wonder what other fatal accidents have been caused by
| dropped electronics such as iPads and iPhones getting stuck
| under accelerators and brake pedals in cars and long haul
| trucks as an example.
|
| Toyota recalled 38m cars because of potential for mats stuck
| under gas pedals. With at least one fatal incident:
|
| https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2009/09/toyota_recal...
| duckmysick wrote:
| The linked article says 3.8 million, a difference of one
| order of magnitude.
| 13of40 wrote:
| Can't remember where I read it, but I heard a theory a long
| time back that people freaking out about spiders and insects in
| their cars could account for a significant number of
| unexplained car accidents. I wonder if we've ever had an
| aircraft accident because of that.
| interestica wrote:
| Ever have that feeling of extreme preparation in a car when
| you feel a sneeze coming on?
| smilespray wrote:
| Last month, I got a speeding ticket because I was distracted
| by a mosquito...
| partdavid wrote:
| That must have been a fast mosquito!
| smilespray wrote:
| Fast and bloodthirsty.
| RalfWausE wrote:
| Quiet plausible... a long time ago i took my motorcycle out
| for the first ride after a long pause, as soon as i left the
| town where i live in and a moment before i would yank the
| throttle open an ABSOLUTELY GIANT (so perhaps a few
| milimeter) spider crawled on the inside of my helmets visor.
| I panicked hard, brought the bike to a screaching halt,
| yanked the helmet from my head and threw it astaundingly far
| away into the wheat field where i stood next to.
|
| I was lucky, would this have happen while riding at 250 km/h
| or knee down in a curve... no, i don't want to think about...
|
| Finding the helmet afterwards was interesting enough...
| camtarn wrote:
| I had a wasp fly into my motorbike helmet one time. The visor
| was down but cracked open slightly to stop it fogging up, and
| it was just big enough for one unlucky bug. Luckily it didn't
| sting me and I was able to come to a controlled stop and take
| the helmet off, but if I'd been in mid-corner and it stung
| me, it would have been bad news.
| whinenot wrote:
| I once had a wasp hiding near my center console start
| stinging my arm as soon as put my arm down as I started
| driving. Fortunately, I was still in my residential
| neighborhood so I was able to pull over and jump out of the
| car without causing an accident but it's easy to imagine the
| poorer consequences had I been a little further in my
| journey.
| lacrimacida wrote:
| I have unpredictible behavior when spiders or roaches are
| crawling on me, it's an automatic reaction I can't seem to
| control. Im not really afraid of spiders or roaches so no
| phobia involved. Once I almost broke my arm, I hit it
| really hard to a wall to get the thing off.
|
| Is there any hope for me to tame these reactions?
| schiem wrote:
| If you're serious about it, the way that I (accidentally)
| found that works is to keep some spiders and roaches as
| pets. I used to be the same way, involuntarily flinching
| whenever a large enough insect would crawl on me until I
| adjusted to being around them all the time. The roaches
| and smaller spiders don't trigger any kind of involuntary
| reflex anymore. I do still flinch when the largest
| spiders (> 5 inch leg span) move very quickly while I'm
| doing maintenance but I'm pretty okay with that,
| especially because one of them could put me in the
| hospital.
| jacquesm wrote:
| > it's easy to imagine the poorer consequences had I been a
| little further in my journey.
|
| The wasp would have been fine.
|
| Makes you wonder how many cause unknown single vehicle
| crashes where the driver dies are the result of insects.
| whinenot wrote:
| Some people may view this scene[0] as overly dramatic,
| whereas I think it's perfectly understandable once it
| happens to you.
|
| [0]https://youtu.be/nJ_pVgV1EZQ?t=216
| morkalork wrote:
| I was cycling with loose shorts once and a bee flew up the
| leg and stung my upper inner thigh. I'm sure if there was
| anyone else on the path when that happened, I would've
| crashed into them.
| fullstop wrote:
| My neighbor, a photographer, was on a tour group which took
| three helicopters up and only two returned. [1] They had an
| aftermarket restraint system to tether the passengers in and
| they were required to cut the restraint to free themselves in
| case of emergency, or unbuckle the tether from behind them
| which was time consuming. One passenger's restraint
| accidentally engaged the emergency fuel shut off lever, and by
| the time the pilot figured out what had happened it was too
| late to correct things and he was forced to land in the river.
|
| None of the passengers were able to cut the restraint to free
| themselves, and all five drowned.
|
| It's not really the same as dropped electronics but it's an
| example of a safety system gone awry.
|
| 1.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_New_York_City_helicopter_...
| fouc wrote:
| > ground crew were responsible for attaching and detaching a
| locking carabiner to the back of each passenger's
| supplemental harness at the start and end of each flight.
|
| ugh, so short sighted!
| oh_sigh wrote:
| Not only were the supplemental harnesses nearly impossible
| to get out of by yourself in an emergency situation, but
| the supplemental harness is what triggered the crash in the
| first place, by getting stuck on the fuel shutoff lever.
|
| I wonder how many lives those supplemental harnesses have
| saved, versus the 5 they cost here.
| fullstop wrote:
| > I wonder how many lives those supplemental harnesses
| have saved, versus the 5 they cost here.
|
| If the story were changed and a handful of people
| accidentally fell out of a helicopter, we'd be asking why
| they weren't strapped in.
| partdavid wrote:
| For me, the aspect of that accident that never gets enough
| attention is the partial failure of the floats.
|
| I think everyone understands that asking people who have
| never drilled a helicopter water escape to take special
| actions in an emergency, let alone reach behind them and cut
| a tether, is just never going to work, certainly not in the
| few seconds they had. If the floats had functioned as
| designed, according to the investigation, everyone would have
| survived. Instead, either because the pilot did not fully
| activate them, or due to some malfunction, the right float
| did not inflate, causing the helicopter to capsize.
|
| It's not completely clear to me, but I don't think they ever
| completely identified the malfunction that resulted in this,
| but as far as I'm concerned, it's a malfunction in a safety-
| critical system that caused deaths, and I'm surprised it's
| not the primary highlight of this accident.
| fullstop wrote:
| Right, they would have had the time to remove the tethers
| if it hadn't sank. Like everything else, I'm sure that they
| require some amount of maintenance and I wonder if that's
| the sort of thing which can be tested without destroying
| it. I trust that my car's airbag will deploy if it's in an
| accident, but I really can't check that. A non-trivial
| number of airbags fail to deploy when they, in fact,
| should.
|
| I'm not surprised that the tether is the focus, though --
| it's the reason why the helicopter crashed to begin with
| and also prevented the passengers from escaping.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| I want to emphasize the point here that _the cause of the
| accident was itself a component of a safety system_.
|
| One point that repeatedly gets lost in considerations of risk
| and security is that _more complex systems intended to
| compensate for other risks_ will _themselves_ become part of
| the risk and /or threat profile.
|
| I've both read of this many times in the case of incidents
| which occur elsewhere, and have seen it firsthand myself
| where some system or method itself intended to compensate for
| a risk turns out to be the cause of an incident.
|
| Power backup systems, fire suppression systems, failover /
| load-balancer devices, and many cases of safety or audit
| code, just off the top of my head.
| msie wrote:
| Ugh, the location of the fuel shutoff lever. It should be
| within easy reach of the pilot but not the passenger!
| partdavid wrote:
| A passenger didn't activate it (although passengers have in
| other aircraft), it was the restraint harness tether that
| got wrapped underneath it.
| _trampeltier wrote:
| Memorys. My sister once left a candle in the car. When i was
| driving down from a mountain (Oberalppass, Switzerland), the
| candle rolled under the break peddal just before a hard u-turn.
| Super scary feeling when you hit the break and nothing does
| happen. I hit the break a second time with full force, the candle
| got pushed away and the ABS safed me.
| throitallaway wrote:
| *brake
| the__alchemist wrote:
| Some loose thoughts:
|
| Military aircraft cockpits sometimes don't have a great concept
| of "inside" and "outside", the way a cell, waterproof device, the
| aircraft's pressure seal etc do. If you drop something (FOD),
| there may not be a clearly defined boundary to where it can end
| up, or it may not be possible to see or get to it while strapped
| in etc. Rudder pedals, or the various mechanical and electrical
| connections around them, as indicated in the article, are a great
| example of this. If you can't find it, the AC may have to be
| grounded and thoroughly searched/panels removed etc.
|
| Military avionics may be missing basic things that an EFB can
| help with, including maps, nav point and airport databases,
| weather info, ADSB info etc. EFBs are (IMO) a poor substitute due
| to the FOD concern here, the clunky touch screen interface (which
| you probably have to take gloves off for), the risk of getting
| locked out of important things like checklist and plates by
| BlackBerry, Foreflight licenses, passcode timers or other
| security layer etc.
|
| You might have a jet that's 30 years old, just got retrofitted
| with a really nice radar etc, but the funding didn't make it
| through for a database, better displays/UI etc that would be
| better integrated with a jet, so you lean on the EFBs.
|
| There are sometimes EFB mounts that can attach to a canopy via
| suction cup, clip onto various surfaces etc.
| scarier wrote:
| For perspective, the thing EFBs primarily replace is paper
| charts and approach plates, which are probably a worse FOD
| hazard due to how many different ones you have to use on a long
| flight. Most military pilots are trained to "dummy-cord" or
| otherwise secure anything that can become a FOD hazard inside
| the cockpit. There are plenty of products out there that let
| you strap a tablet to your leg at least as securely as a
| traditional kneeboard or IFR strap.
| mmaunder wrote:
| FOD? "EFBs are (IMO) a poor substitute due to the FOD concern
| here, the clunky touch screen interface (which you probably
| have to take gloves off for), the risk of getting locked out of
| important things like checklist and plates by BlackBerry,
| Foreflight licenses, passcode timers or other security layer
| etc."???
|
| This is basically just wrong. EFBs like ForeFlight are an
| incredibly rich and indispensable suite of tools from approach
| plates to a huge range of charts to log books to synthetic
| vision to adsb-in and much more. And operationally they're very
| reliable and robust. I'm instrument rated, fly with a primary
| and backup iPad and have mine clamped to the yoke and it ain't
| going anywhere.
|
| ForeFlight licenses? What are you even talking about? In North
| America FF is almost a standard among GA pilots.
| civilitty wrote:
| The GP is talking about them in an operational military
| context, not a GA. I'm not too familiar with helicopters but
| see the L39 Alabtross or T38, for example. Even in trainer
| jets that are optimized for keeping students alive, the PIC
| can barely fit an iPad mini anywhere in the cockpit and there
| are tons of little places for things to fall and jam any
| number of mechanical linkages.
| [deleted]
| FabHK wrote:
| Near-crash due to dropped pen: _Air show plane went into nose
| dive after loose pen in cockpit jammed the controls_
|
| https://archive.is/YmIgB
| bbojan wrote:
| There was a helicopter crash in Canada due to an unrestrained
| tool bag: https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.ctvnews.ca/local/
| ottawa/20...
|
| And this one in Ireland due to a rag:
| https://www.irishtimes.com/news/helicopter-crash-caused-
| by-c...
| rsynnott wrote:
| > If you can't find it, the AC may have to be grounded and
| thoroughly searched/panels removed etc.
|
| _Why_ is this? Weight reduction or something? On the face of it
| it sounds like a design flaw.
| PuffinBlue wrote:
| I think the article and this mishap is an example of the
| reason why - if you can't find a dropped and loose object in
| the cockpit then you can't fly the aircraft because it may
| move in flight to somewhere where it can interfere with the
| controls.
|
| In writing this answer it struck me you might be reading AC
| as Air Conditioning, instead of AirCraft, which I suppose
| could have lead to your question asking about weight
| reduction.
| lukeschlather wrote:
| Out of context I read AC as "alternating current" with
| "grounded" taking on a totally different meaning.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Hopefully, we never need an aircraft to be fully grounded
| with a tethered cable. That'd be ridiculous. As a kid, I
| had a plane that was tethered and would only fly in
| circles. Oh, where the mind wanders on a Friday
| WastingMyTime89 wrote:
| > Hopefully, we never need an aircraft to be fully
| grounded with a tethered cable.
|
| That's one way of landing an helicopter on a boat in a
| rough sea. It works surprisingly well.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Speaking of grounding a helicopter, it reminded me of the
| Hunt For Red October scene of trying to get a person from
| a helicopter to a submarine. It always seemed like such a
| complicated something as opposed to just putting someone
| in the water to let a diver collect them, which is
| precisely what wound up happening anyways
| Arrath wrote:
| My cousin was picked up from a submarine by a helicopter,
| I'll have to ask him how that was orchestrated.
| dylan604 wrote:
| To me, it's still a helicopter that can hover. If your
| cousin had been picked up from a submarine with a sky
| hook, then that's over the top.
| chipsa wrote:
| When planes are on the ground, they usually are fully
| grounded with a tethered cable for ESD reasons.
| [deleted]
| Arrath wrote:
| Its standard to ground out a helicopter carrying a sling
| load before the load is touched/handled (it may even have
| a longer grounding cable that drags across the ground as
| it descends) because it can gather some pretty dangerous
| levels of charge.
| [deleted]
| rsynnott wrote:
| Oh, sure, I get that if something gets lost you need to
| find it. My impression from the comment was that military
| cockpits were designed such that it was easier for stuff to
| get lost than it might be, tho, which is what I was curious
| about.
| TylerE wrote:
| Military cockpits are a moving target in more ways than
| one. The cockpit of an aircraft like the B-52 is
| unrecognizable from when it was built.
| bitwalker wrote:
| I worked on F-16 avionics (in aircraft maintenance, on
| the flightline), there are a lot of little
| nooks/holes/slots/gaps where small bits of FOD can fall
| and be incredibly difficult to extract, and the fear of
| that FOD causing a jam, flying around the cockpit, or
| getting wedged and causing unexpected wear on wiring
| harnesses and then shorting out (or worse, arcing) during
| flight was a _big_ deal. FOD in the cockpit was basically
| the worst thing that could happen during routine
| maintenance, because if you couldn't see it, and either
| couldn't get to it with a magnet (or the FOD wasn't
| metal), it might require pulling _a lot_ of stuff out of
| the cockpit before you could reach into the area where it
| fell. The worst case that could easily happen was having
| to have Egress come out and pull the ejection seat so you
| could get under it.
|
| I always figured that all of those little gaps/etc. were
| due to a couple factors:
|
| 1.) the aircraft are constantly being upgraded/modified,
| so even if you designed the aircraft to be gap-free
| initially, there will inevitably be changes that
| introduce them. The cockpit itself is basically a frame
| with racks that hold all of the avionics, seat, etc.
|
| 2.) in conjunction with the above, ease of maintenance
| was somewhat important, so they tried to leave at least a
| little room to maneuver in the cockpit where possible
| (though there were plenty of places which were a
| nightmare to work regardless), but that comes at the cost
| of introducing areas where things can fall.
|
| 3.) some components have to be regularly removed and
| worked on outside the aircraft, or must be free of
| obstruction during flight, e.g. the ejection seat. So you
| end up with plenty of gaps where things can fall.
| HumblyTossed wrote:
| Why would one waste money (and weight) building a cockpit
| that was more than just utilitarian? It is a war machine
| which may get lost in war (or war practice).
| rsynnott wrote:
| One way to get lost, in war or otherwise, feels like
| someone dropping an iPad where no iPad should be. And
| these things aren't _generally_ exactly built on the
| cheap.
| sitkack wrote:
| Sounds like a design flaw if there is so much open
| machinery that a dislodged part can jam everything up.
| Stuff comes apart.
|
| A general engineering design principle is that things
| degrade smoothly so that there aren't abrupt changes in
| performance.
|
| The aircraft controls should be protected such that
| foreign objects should have a low likelihood of jamming
| them. That there aren't things preventing someone from
| clearing any blockages and there aren't places where they
| could lever themselves in.
|
| My car has a design flaw with respect to the floor mats
| and the accelerator pedal (its not a Toyota). Between how
| the lever arm and the pedal surface itself are design and
| the aftermarket floor mat, if the mat slides forward it
| can jam the accelerator down. These are the deep groove
| mats for catching mud and water. The designers didn't
| think of this, if the pivot point for the pedal was
| further up the firewall. The pedal also has a hard square
| edge. Both of those things are in _general_ a design flaw
| for pedals. The NHTSA (National Highway Transportation
| Safety Administration) should and maybe they have (my car
| is old) the design of the pedal linkage and the shape of
| the pedal to reduce this kind of risk. The hooks for
| securing floor mats should also be standardized to help
| keep them in place.
|
| The hard mount points for child seats are a great
| positive example of this.
| civilitty wrote:
| _> The hard mount points for child seats are a great
| positive example of this._
|
| You're comparing child seats built for the greatest
| common denominator to high tech war machines that were
| built on the principle of "kill or be killed" for the
| best funded and most advanced armed forces on Earth.
| Every kilo of paneling is another kilo that slows down
| the aircraft, reduces its range, and changes its
| balance/maneuverability.
|
| Aircraft technicians are just expected not to drop pens
| and other crap in cockpits and engines on a regular
| basis. It's a completely different operational context.
| dTal wrote:
| Avoiding the need to ground and strip the aircraft every
| time someone drops a pen seems pretty utilitarian.
| awhow wrote:
| You don't want a screwdriver, or anything else, pressed up
| against a control rod or a rotating component.
| 83 wrote:
| Because while the FOD might not be an immediate problem, it
| could bounce around and get caught in a mechanical linkage
| causing a fatal crash, could be rubbing against wires causing
| a fatal crash, could start on fire (if it has lithium
| battery) causing a fatal crash, could cause a huge delay when
| maintenance finds a random part bouncing around later on and
| they don't know what it's from... you get the idea.
| ta123456789 wrote:
| I thought the question is not why this is a problem, but
| rather why is it possible at all for a loose object to end
| up in the depths of the AC to cause problems. Is there some
| reason we cannot avoid this?
|
| From a laymans perspective I think of a car, where dropping
| something small while driving is unlikely to cause problems
| in the machinery.
| r3trohack3r wrote:
| Depending on your definition of "small" this is not true.
| I used to slide my flip flops off while driving until one
| got wedged under the break pedal and prevented me from
| breaking.
| qotgalaxy wrote:
| [dead]
| bitwalker wrote:
| Cars have a lot of trim/seals/insulation/carpeting to
| reduce road noise and be aesthetically pleasing, and
| military aircraft cockpits don't care about either of
| those things, and are largely just a metal tube with
| racks on which all of the avionics and other cockpit
| equipment are mounted, with holes in a handful of places
| where wiring harnesses enter/exit the cockpit. All of
| that equipment is regularly worked on, removed/replaced,
| and so it is necessary that it be (relatively) easy to
| access and remove.
|
| The equivalent would be like if you had to pull all of
| the instruments, electronics, and seats out of your car
| every 1000 miles, clean them up, replace faulty bits, and
| then put it all back again. All of the fancy trim,
| carpeting, etc., just makes that job harder, so you would
| probably want a car that doesn't have any of that, and is
| designed to make doing that kind of work easier, better
| still if you can avoid having to remove everything, and
| only have to remove the bits individually that need to be
| maintained. The down side of course, is that without all
| of the fancy trim and stuff, there would be gaps where
| things could fall and be hard to reach, and holes where
| wiring travels to the engine compartment/trunk/etc. Of
| course, FOD presents way less of a danger in a car than
| it does an aircraft, so you might not care if you drop
| something there, but aside from that, I think the analogy
| holds up.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| Well, for starters, cars are designed to only travel in
| two dimensions, so that limits the problem quite a bit.
| maushu wrote:
| Because the missing device might cause something similar to
| this crash but instead with a internal mechanism. You really
| don't want loose stuff around moving mechanisms.
| sph wrote:
| FOD? EFB? Any explanation of these acronyms for people outside
| the US military?
| fullstop wrote:
| FOD = Foreign Object Debris
|
| EFB = Electronic Flight ~Book~ Bag
|
| edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_flight_bag
|
| It's bag, not book.
| foobarbecue wrote:
| The article says the B in EFB is "bag." Seemed strange to
| me, but I'm not familiar with the term. Do you think the
| article got it wrong?
| PlatinumHarp wrote:
| No it's not wrong. The EFB replaces the contents of a
| traditional physical flight bag: binders full of charts,
| manuals for the plane, Airline documentation etc.
| theolivenbaum wrote:
| It used to be an actual bag full of paper
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_bag
| fullstop wrote:
| I could be wrong, for sure.
| modernerd wrote:
| > The EFB gets its name from the traditional pilot's
| flight bag, which is typically a heavy (up to or over 18
| kg or 40 lb) documents bag that pilots carry to the
| cockpit.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_flight_bag
| theolivenbaum wrote:
| It used to be an actual bag full of paper:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_bag
| 0ct4via wrote:
| Neither of these terms are unique to the US, or the military,
| or indeed the US military specifically.
|
| FOD = foreign object debris... basically anything loose that
| can end up somewhere it doesn't and cause Foreign Object
| Damage - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_object_damage
|
| EFB = electronic flight bag ... basically using
| screens/displays (and more recently, the likes of iPads
| issued to Students / Flight Officers/ Pilots) which carry
| things like aircraft manuals, checklists, airport procedures,
| airport and aerodrome diagrams, etc. -- so called because
| they're designed to replace the "flight bag" that could be
| filled with over half a dozen (or more)heavy, chunky-as-heck
| books and binders containing the same information in paper
| form.
|
| This becomes especially relevant when commercial aviation
| requires flight deck personnel to carry significant amounts
| of information like that with them, like train drivers can
| also have to do (rule books, locomotive / rolling stock
| manuals, track/depot diagrams, etc.)
|
| Again, not remotely limited to the US military, or to the US
| or military in general -- these terms are common for those in
| aviation :)
| 0ct4via wrote:
| In-cabin FOD can be things like loose pens (or even just
| pen lids/caps), iPads/books, etc. - which is why there are
| generally rules (admittedly more in the military, because
| they like that sort of thing) about ensuring things either
| meet certain FOD requirements/regulations (i.e. pens with
| screw-on caps, fitted in specific pen pockets, rather than
| one with a cap that could slide off, loose in a regular
| pocket), so ensure they don't end up interfering or
| blocking controls, etc.
|
| As for outside the aircraft, FOD can cover anything from
| loose rubber / screws, etc. on the runway that could end up
| damaging the tires or being taken through the engines, to
| in-flight FOD risks like bird strikes and volcanic ash -
| which obviously are also foreign objects that risk damage
| to the aircraft.
| dopamean wrote:
| FWIW these are aviation terms not military.
| foobarbecue wrote:
| FOD is foreign object debris. EFB, "electronic flight bag" is
| discussed in the article.
| kunwon1 wrote:
| FOD = Foreign Objects and Debris EFB = Electronic Flight Bag.
| A flight bag, traditionally, contains charts and checklists.
| EFB means you have a device that contains those documents
|
| 20 years ago, I was an avionics technician on F-16 fighter
| jets in the USAF. We had 'FOD Walks' daily, which involved
| slowly walking down the flightline while staring at the
| ground, and picking up any loose objects
|
| Even a tiny object, when ingested into a jet engine, can
| cause catastrophic damage. And F-16s have intakes very low to
| the ground, making them a much higher FOD risk.
|
| The worst FOD events were when something broke. We used bit
| drivers to remove aircraft panels, and the bits were fairly
| standard screwdriver bits. Sometimes, one of those bits would
| shatter when applying force to remove a stubborn fastener. If
| that happens, you have to retrieve every single piece of
| metal. If you return your toolbox at the end of the day and
| it is missing anything that can't be accounted for, the
| entire flightline could be shut down while a search is
| carried out.
|
| Dropping things in the cockpit could sometimes be much worse.
| If it drops down into a void left by removing a control
| panel, then it could potentially fall to the 'bottom' of the
| aircraft. If that happens, you'll be taking off all the
| panels in that vicinity, you'll have multiple people looking
| with flashlights, borescopes, etc.
|
| If something is dropped but can't be found, that's probably a
| multi-day event that will involve some fairly high ranking
| people.
|
| FOD was considered a serious threat, and a tiny piece of
| metal broken off of a tool could hinder operations for days
| at a time
| dredmorbius wrote:
| A reminder that the fatal crash of Air France Flight 4590,
| Concorde on takeoff from Charles de Gaulle airport, France,
| in 2000 was due to tire debris on the runway:
|
| _While taking off from Charles de Gaulle Airport, the
| aircraft ran over debris on the runway, causing a tyre to
| explode and disintegrate. Tyre fragments, launched upwards
| at great speed by the rapidly spinning wheel, violently
| struck the underside of the wing, damaging parts of the
| landing gear - thus preventing its retraction - and causing
| the integral fuel tank to rupture. Large amounts of fuel
| leaking from the rupture ignited, causing a loss of thrust
| in the left-hand-side engines 1 and 2. The aircraft lifted
| off, but the loss of thrust, high drag from the extended
| landing gear, and fire damage to the flight controls made
| it impossible to maintain control. The jet crashed into a
| hotel in nearby Gonesse two minutes after takeoff. All nine
| crew and 100 passengers on board were killed, as well as
| four people in the hotel. Six other people in the hotel
| were critically injured._
|
| <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_4590>
|
| The debris was a metal strip "435 millimetres (17.1 in)
| long, 29 to 34 millimetres (1.1 to 1.3 in) wide, and 1.4
| millimetres (0.055 in) thick", which had detached from a
| DC-10 which had taken off five minutes prior to the
| Concorde.
| kunwon1 wrote:
| It is my understanding that, after the loss of the
| Concorde, one of the resultant advisories mentioned an
| automated FOD detection system, which did not exist at
| the time. There are now multiple companies selling such
| systems, using radar and optical sensors, and the FAA has
| advisories related to same [1] (pdf link)
|
| The best possible outcome from a fatal crash is
| regulation that will prevent similar accidents in the
| future. I don't think automatic FOD detection is
| mandatory (at least, I can't find any evidence of a
| mandate) - but I assume that it will eventually be
| mandated, as costs come down.
|
| [1] https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Ci
| rcular/...
| pmarreck wrote:
| FOD = Foreign Object Damage, or in general, any object that
| could become a projectile when behind a jet or inhaled into
| it when in front of one.
|
| EFB is actually defined in the article
| guestbest wrote:
| Funny thing is that these terms are just as familiar outside
| the air wing of the military as civilian aviation. If you
| used these terms with infantry, they'd just look blankly at
| you.
| black6 wrote:
| Foreign Object (Debris|Damage)
|
| Electronic Flight Book
| d1sxeyes wrote:
| Foreign Object Debris (shit that's not supposed be there) and
| Electronic Flight Bag (an iPad or some other type of device
| which replaces paperwork)
| amelius wrote:
| Reminds me that it happens quite often that e.g. a water bottle
| or a jar of apple sauce gets lodged under the brake pedal of a
| car.
| blantonl wrote:
| EFB (Electronic Flight Bags) have introduced all kinds of
| usability issues with aircraft that pilots must account for, and
| not just for mechanical reasons. Objects getting jammed into
| flight controls isn't an ipad phenomenon - clipboards, water
| bottles, etc all have contributed to mishaps.
|
| One major issue with EFBs is many pilots extensive reliance on
| them for navigation and traffic avoidance, and their failure in
| flight since they are commercial off the shelf products. A very
| common issue during the summer months is for an iPad to very
| easily overheat and just shut down. Another is battery life.
| iPads are consumer electronic devices and aren't held to even a
| semblance of tolerances that aircraft avionics are held to, but
| they are relied upon as critial tools in flight now.
|
| I've directly seen instances of aircraft that have violated
| airspace, gotten lost, and other issues that contribute just one
| more hole to the "swiss cheese" model of a catastrophic loss.
| bredren wrote:
| The ill-fated submersible Titan has been routed for its use of
| consumer grade hardware in displays and controls. I doubt it's
| the only vessel to rely on this class of electronics.
|
| I wonder what it means that despite the risks involved these
| products continue to make it into mission critical workflows at
| sea and air.
| legitster wrote:
| On the USS Indiana you can seem them proudly highlighting the
| US of an Xbox controller: https://youtu.be/0StWrXoN8nI?t=509
| (Also note the insane amount of screens in the control room).
|
| But highlighting the gamepad on the Titan seems like more of
| a "gotcha" that journalists have latched onto than a
| legitimate concern. It almost certainly didn't fail because
| of consumer grade hardware - it failed because of poor
| engineering of its hull.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| Using a witeless gamepad as the primary maneuvering
| controls of a manned undersea vessel without an onboard
| backup is one (of very many) indications of reckless corner
| cutting, but, yes, not particularly likely the critical
| failure point.
| Clamchop wrote:
| The Titan had multiple failsafes to drop ballast and return
| to the surface under its own buoyancy. One such failsafe was
| time-delayed by material corrosion in seawater so it would
| eventually ascend without intervention.
|
| The cabin electronics weren't essential to its safety. The
| hull might have been, though. Hard to say.
| chx wrote:
| Come now, the Titan should never have been built, the primary
| cause of loss was the carbon fiber laminate which is simply
| the wrong material for a submersible. This is not hindsight,
| there's a five year old terse answer on Quora of all places
| stating this: https://www.quora.com/Is-it-feasible-to-build-
| submarine-hull... and again three years ago
| https://www.quora.com/Why-isnt-the-military-navy-using-
| carbo...
|
| > Carbon fiber's compression strength is poor. Its shear
| strength is low. It doesn't dent; it either splinters or
| returns to shape and hides severe damage in the laminate.
| kayfox wrote:
| There are stories of maintenance going behind the instrument
| panels in airliners and finding all sorts of lost paperwork.
| mfkp wrote:
| My ipad shut down today on the ground while taking off due to
| extreme heat. Luckily I'm not an idiot and have backups in the
| cockpit.
| latchkey wrote:
| It could have been a book, an ipad, a phone, camera, anything
| really... I wonder if the general design could be changed to help
| prevent anything from falling between the pedal and the wall...
| CodeWriter23 wrote:
| I think it would be SOP to have all objects mounted or
| restrained in a helicopter cockpit.
| unilynx wrote:
| But if you know there's always going to be an iPad around the
| cockpit, you can advise the pilots to have a fixed method of
| securing it
|
| Of course there's always something else that can go wrong, but
| a big part of why flying is so safe today is that they've gone
| through a lot of trouble to enumerate and mitigate everything
| that has gone wrong in the past
| Etrnl_President wrote:
| A lanyard securing it to airframe or wrist, with a quick-
| disconnect in case of entanglement?
| alistairSH wrote:
| It common to use a "kneeboard"[1] to secure an EFB to the
| pilot's thigh. I'm surprised it's not standard practice and
| that a loose EFB is ever acceptable.
|
| 1 - https://www.67d.com/cdn/shop/files/KneeboardwithiPad11P
| ro-22...
| kgilpin wrote:
| Some people don't like knee boards because you have to
| move your head up-down-up-down to use it, and that can be
| disorienting, especially in poor visibility conditions
| (when external visual references are minimal). There are
| other types of mounts available, such as suction mounts,
| that mount the device closer to eye level, but while
| robust these are not as secure as built-in equipment. The
| overheat problem is real as well, but having your iPad
| shut down in flight is nowhere near as big a deal as
| having it jam in the rudder pedals.
|
| Further reading: https://airfactsjournal.com/2018/10/how-
| spatial-disorientati...
| nsxwolf wrote:
| When I used to fly (pre-iPad) I used a kneeboard for my
| paper charts, pencils, etc. Great to know that everything
| is right there and isn't falling on the floor.
| nntwozz wrote:
| Maybe Apple Vision Pro (sometime in the future)?
| Someone wrote:
| The pilot could drop its battery pack.
|
| Also, if the battery pack were to come loose or the device
| would loose power in another way, I guess the pilot would
| rapidly take it off without much regard for where it ends up.
|
| And of course, it would require a specialized version, as the
| pilot was already wearing a flight helmet.
| buildbot wrote:
| The military version of this is basically the F35 helmet:
| https://www.radiantvisionsystems.com/blog/worlds-most-
| advanc...
| rolph wrote:
| in an aircraft, its best to minimize the number and type of
| unsecured items.
|
| its all relative, if the vehicle shifts place in the air
| relative to momentum, loose things get tossed around in the
| cabin/the cabin gets tossed around against loose items.
|
| this was exacerbated by the tight cabinspace, and probably
| about a half second to get the obstruction out. i used to see a
| lot of something like, a beverage bottle, or a coffee mug, roll
| up under the pedals of a vehicle, after falling out of the
| beverage holder.
| [deleted]
| simias wrote:
| My software dev mind went elsewhere, I wonder if the long term
| solution might not be to make all these controls inputs to some
| computer ("fly-by-wire") that could be toggled to some failsafe
| mode if the physical devices jam somehow. You could decouple
| the pilot's inputs from the copilot for instance.
|
| Of course as we've seen in the past that can introduce its own
| issues, for instance during the AF447 crash:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447
|
| >Confused, Bonin exclaimed, "I don't have control of the
| airplane any more now", and two seconds later, "I don't have
| control of the airplane at all!" Robert responded to this by
| saying, "controls to the left", and took over control of the
| aircraft. He pushed his side-stick forward to lower the nose
| and recover from the stall; however, Bonin was still pulling
| his side-stick back. The inputs cancelled each other out and
| triggered an audible "dual input" warning.
| nerdponx wrote:
| This story is horrifying, but it seems more like catastrophic
| pilot error than a problem with the fly by wire system.
| Mawr wrote:
| Unless the plan is to remove pilots altogether, this line
| of thinking is just going to lead to more incidents.
|
| See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36725176
| Mawr wrote:
| Ah, the dual input nonsense, see my other comment on just
| that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36729484.
|
| Here's the dual-input moment of this crash:
| https://youtu.be/e5AGHEUxLME?t=2876
| andrewstuart2 wrote:
| The fact that it was an ipad and not a book probably
| contributed to the fact that they could identify the gouge
| marks. If it was a book this might still be more of a mystery.
| The takeaway in the last paragraph seems to be a good one:
|
| > "Hopefully this accident will prompt operators to have a long
| hard look at all possible loose articles in cockpits and
| robustly securing valuable tools and sources of situational
| awareness like EFBs," he told Vertical by email.
|
| My understanding is that iPads are super popular for pilots,
| especially of non-commercial jets, because at the price point,
| plus buying a few apps, the experience and utility is pretty
| unmached. Aviation-grade equipment is super expensive because
| it goes through many regulatory hurdles which are,
| unfortunately, written in blood as this one might be. But I
| would hope to see regulators, if they do something, take a
| pragmatic and balanced approach given the benefits of
| accessible electronics.
| pc86 wrote:
| I think it's unlikely that there be any additional
| regulations from this, especially in the Part 91 / GA arena
| (which this flight was not), but I've been surprised before.
| greensoap wrote:
| Everyone in aviation is moving to electronic flight bags.
| Military, commercial, non-commercial. The US Airforce moved
| to iPads 10 years ago -- https://www.zdnet.com/article/u-s-
| air-force-plans-50m-saving...
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| I think some airlines are now requiring iPads for their
| pilots since it can replace all of the paper manuals and
| charts that need to be in the cockpit[1].
|
| [1]https://www.engadget.com/2013-06-24-ipad-now-being-used-
| in-e...
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| Minor clarification as I was initially confused: The
| airline provides the iPads. Pilots aren't allowed to use
| their personal devices.
| xp84 wrote:
| It seems like if there's a device important enough to warrant
| being in the cockpit, it ought to be secured semi-permanently
| to a purpose-built mount while the aircraft is in motion.
|
| > take a pragmatic and balanced approach given the benefits
| of accessible electronics
|
| A very solid ProClipUSA mount for an iPad can be had for
| under $200, so assuming a 3x multiplier for regulatory
| certification, I don't think that requirement would make
| anything less accessible. I hope that devices flopping about
| the cockpit like this is a practice that will be phased out.
| alistairSH wrote:
| One of the advantages of an EFB is its portability. The
| pilot can load/edit plans prior to boarding.
|
| But, yeah, either kneeboard[1] or "RAM" mount should at
| least be standard practice if not required. And removing
| the EFB from the mount once airborne should not be standard
| or allowed.
|
| 1 - https://www.67d.com/cdn/shop/files/KneeboardwithiPad11P
| ro-22...
| steve76 wrote:
| [dead]
| nier wrote:
| Both sets of pedals are of course linked so that the second pilot
| could never have brought the helicopter out of this predicament.
| Would an input monitoring and control system like on large
| airplanes have avoided the crash?
|
| There's an answer [0] on Quora that describes helicopter
| instructors having to deal with students frozen out of fear and
| wrestling for control of the inputs. Nightmare.
|
| [0]: https://www.quora.com/What-happens-if-the-pilot-and-
| copilot-...
| Mawr wrote:
| > Would an input monitoring and control system like on large
| airplanes have avoided the crash?
|
| Not at all, for example Airbus aircraft "helpfully" average out
| the inputs. There's a dual input warning, but warnings are weak
| at preventing accidents.
|
| Some instances where the awful UX around the handling of dual
| input by aircraft contributed to incidents:
|
| - https://youtu.be/6tIVu0Dpc2o?t=1754
|
| - https://youtu.be/V2mMs-h4qGE?t=949
|
| - https://youtu.be/Dl-Fl66Jfao?t=977
|
| - https://youtu.be/tXGET4-N9FA?t=983
|
| - https://youtu.be/e5AGHEUxLME?t=2259 &
| https://youtu.be/e5AGHEUxLME?t=2876
|
| IMO, this is a critical design flaw with all current aircraft
| that should be addressed ASAP but what do I know :)
| wpietri wrote:
| For anybody that liked the style of this sort of analysis, let me
| strongly recommend Dekker's "Field Guide to Understanding 'Human
| Error'": https://www.amazon.com/Field-Guide-Understanding-Human-
| Error...
|
| It focuses on air crash investigations. But it's very useful to
| tech people in understanding the right way to approach incident
| investigations. It can be very easy to blame individuals ("stupid
| pilot shouldn't have dropped his iPad", etc), but that focus
| prevents improving safety over the long term. Dekker's book is a
| great argument for, as here, thinking about what actually
| happened and why as a systemic thing. Which provides much more
| fertile ground for making sure it doesn't happen again.
| teachrdan wrote:
| The "Accidents in North American Climbing" series is a great
| intro to this style of analysis, too. A number of compelling,
| short accounts, usually with actionable analysis at the end.
| You get the added bonus of learning new things, like what an
| "air hammer" is, and how getting knocked out of your tent by
| one can help save you from an avalanche.
|
| https://www.amazon.com/Accidents-North-American-Climbing-202...
| elicash wrote:
| I know nothing about helicopters, but just from driving a car I'd
| imagine there are a variety of ways the pedal can jam even
| without something falling in that space. Does a helicopter have
| an equivalent of shifting your car into neutral? (Which, given
| you're in the air, might not be a good idea ha. But hopefully you
| get my gist.)
| colechristensen wrote:
| The thing about helicopters is they are maintained to an insane
| level from an outside perspective. Parts have lifespans where
| you replace them when they're expired regardless of condition,
| they go through intense inspections, pilots are experts. Things
| tend to not just "jam".
|
| There is a concept of disconnecting the engine from the rotors,
| but it's not the kind of thing that happens accidentally.
| alistairSH wrote:
| The automobile equivalent would be something jamming your
| steering wheel to one side - even if you decoupled the motor
| from the rotor (and tried to auto-gyro to safety), the
| helicopter would still be stuck in a sideways spiral.
| jldugger wrote:
| Yea, autogyro (which I only know about due to this vid[1])
| sounds like the answer to OP's question, but that would not
| (and clearly _did not) save this Chinook from what happened.
|
| [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiTuwQGImNo
| jaclaz wrote:
| The autogyro is a type of airplane:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autogyro
|
| You mean autorotation, I believe:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autorotation
| jldugger wrote:
| Ah, yea.
| blantonl wrote:
| _Does a helicopter have an equivalent of shifting your car into
| neutral?_
|
| There really isn't. A helicopter is a coupled collection of
| parts and power that is working in concert to not immediately
| return to the ground in a violent manner. And a helicopter's
| power profile is also working in more dimensions than a car.
|
| Each of the flight controls are critical components that work
| together. You take one out of the equation and things
| exponentially get more complex.
| 4rt wrote:
| An example often given (UK) is a drinks can being stuck under
| the brake pedal.
| Simulacra wrote:
| I'm surprised they wouldn't have had that strapped to a thigh, or
| mounted.
| FullyFunctional wrote:
| A former coworker had a bad car crash after his _cat_ jumped down
| between his feet!
|
| When I took driving lesson, my instructor painted a vivid picture
| of the consequence of a crash while transporting heavy unsecured
| objects behind me - that lesson has stayed with me for over 30
| years.
| Etrnl_President wrote:
| Always check your equipment for F.O.D.
| gpvos wrote:
| FOD = Foreign Object Debris
| dingaling wrote:
| *Damage
|
| The use of Debris is a recent corruption of the term,
| apparently in an attempt to nounify the acronym.
|
| It's also tautologous; if it's a foreign object then
| implicitly it's debris.
| kunwon1 wrote:
| I learned the definition as 'Foreign Objects and Debris'
| when I was trained in the USAF in 2001, but I recently read
| an FAA document that used a different definition. I'm not
| sure there is agreement on what this acronym actually
| stands for.
| pengaru wrote:
| I've only flown RC helis, more like, attempted to fly them before
| inevitably always crashing. At least whenever it was a full-blown
| "collective pitch" model.
|
| Can't imagine how mortifying it must have been to have any of the
| controls jammed up like that. These things require constant
| corrective inputs to remain airborne in anything resembling
| stable flight. And close to the ground loading water from a
| stream, with all that turbulence? Nightmare fuel.
| jacquesm wrote:
| In the age of solid state gyros that's a lot easier now then it
| was in the 80's.
| pengaru wrote:
| Does that relate better or worse to flying a Rotak Chinook?
| jacquesm wrote:
| That was one context switch too many.
| FabHK wrote:
| Somewhat related: An Icon A5 amphibious airplane [1] came down
| [2] because the occupants left a bluetooth speaker on top which
| hit the propeller upon take-off... You have to treat aircraft a
| bit more carefully than cars. (No fatalities, fortunately.)
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICON_A5
|
| [2] https://www.aviation-safety.net/wikibase/236728
| exabrial wrote:
| Reminds me of the time I helped fish a mechanical pencil out of
| grand piano. It was dropped in _just_ the right spot that it
| jammed the sustain pedal open, but was completely unreachable,
| and the pianists sort of made the problem worse. Ended up using
| some mountain bike tools to get it out ironically (Park Tool
| IR-1.2).
|
| It's very sad to see a tragedy like this caused by something so
| simple :(
| jacquesm wrote:
| Eliane Rodrigues had something like that happen, she dealt with
| it in the most graceful and hilarious way:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBbRTRBY4D4
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| There was some F1 driver a long time ago whose throttle jammed
| just as he was about to enter a turn. It cleared up after
| exiting, but now he realized that he could safely take that
| turn at wide open throttle and went on to win the race.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-07-14 23:02 UTC)