[HN Gopher] Airliner hit by possible space debris
___________________________________________________________________
Airliner hit by possible space debris
Author : d_silin
Score : 128 points
Date : 2025-10-19 17:54 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (avbrief.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (avbrief.com)
| saltyoldman wrote:
| It definitely would more likely be a meteorite than anything
| else.
| SteveNuts wrote:
| What makes a meteorite more likely
| schoen wrote:
| Just that many more of them are present in the atmosphere
| than reentering space debris pieces.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _many more of them are present in the atmosphere_
|
| At 36,000 feet?
| amelius wrote:
| Why not? What comes down must come from somewhere up.
| natebc wrote:
| still a lot more birds than meteorites or spacecraft.
| dboreham wrote:
| There are not many birds at cruising altitude. Some, but
| not many.
| rawling wrote:
| Some earlier discussion:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45633191
| hughes wrote:
| There should be small pieces of whatever they hit embedded in the
| body & glass of the aircraft. As long as they are analyzed, the
| cause of this won't remain a mystery forever.
| Reason077 wrote:
| My first thought was that this is more likely to be a
| spontaneous failure of the windshield glass under pressure, due
| to manufacturing flaw or improper maintenance. Things like that
| have certainly happened before. But then again, it seems weird
| that glass fragments would be projected _inward_ in that
| scenario.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Don't worry, if it can be blamed on Boeing, it will be.
| hsbauauvhabzb wrote:
| Not unless you want to be spontaneously hit by a falling
| meteorite yourself in some kind of freak accident / suicide
| scenario.
| pdabbadabba wrote:
| Well, they _do_ make satellites...
| WalterBright wrote:
| > it seems weird that glass fragments would be projected
| inward in that scenario
|
| At speed, I don't know what the outside pressure on the
| windshield would be, but I'd be surprised if it was lower
| than the cabin air pressure.
|
| After all, it is called a wind "shield".
| icegreentea2 wrote:
| Plugging in 35k ft altitude, and 775 ft/s velocity here
| (https://www.spaceworks.aero/fcc2/index.html) gives dynamic
| pressure of 220 lb/ft2, vs ~2100 lb/ft2 for 1atm at sea
| level (the same calculator says 7k ft altitude has a static
| pressure of ~1600 lb/ft2, or rough idea of cabin air
| pressure).
| rootusrootus wrote:
| There are pictures of the outside where you can clearly see
| impact damage to the top of the window frame.
| shrx wrote:
| Unless it was hail.
| kleiba wrote:
| What are the odds?
| seltzered_ wrote:
| The odds are much higher these days:
| https://www.livescience.com/space/astronomy/what-goes-up-mus...
| tavavex wrote:
| Much higher than a few decades back, but still effectively
| zero. Even after putting up X thousands of satellites up into
| orbit, they still physically cover a tiny total surface area.
| And the same goes for planes. So two of these colliding would
| be a monumental freak accident, which is why I'm still
| assuming it's not space debris until more information shows
| up.
| inopinatus wrote:
| A million to one, they said.
| robotresearcher wrote:
| But still they come.
| antod wrote:
| That's if it was coming from Mars specifically.
| michaelcampbell wrote:
| Given that it happened, 100%?
| krisoft wrote:
| > Apparently only one layer of the windshield was damaged
|
| How does that square with the picture of the pilot's arm with
| tiny cuts? Did the space debris only damage the internal layer?
| Something is not adding up to me here.
| gnarlouse wrote:
| Maybe the outermost layers just transferred the energy to the
| innermost, which exploded tiny shards of glass? In general
| though, I agree, weird.
| Jalad wrote:
| And in tank warfare this is called spalling
|
| A projectile hits the armor and doesn't penetrate it, but the
| armor inside still fragments and injured the operators
| Aloisius wrote:
| There a picture of glass spall in the cockpit and it's not
| unusual for ballistics glass to spall when hit by a
| projectile.
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/ThatLookedExpensive/comments/1oaln
| x...
| crazygringo wrote:
| Came here to ask the same thing -- something is missing from
| the reporting because this makes absolutely no sense.
| JBiserkov wrote:
| Speculation-free facts: https://avherald.com/h?article=52e80701
|
| https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL1093/history/2025...
| gpm wrote:
| Interesting that there's been a bird strike at that altitude
| before (per the comments in avherald). I didn't know birds flew
| that high.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| I can't remember the species, but there's a bird that files
| crazy high. I think it's a vulture.
| marcosdumay wrote:
| Yes, vultures can fly crazy high, and do a lot of damage to
| aircraft.
|
| They are a well-known nemesis of military planes, that fly
| faster and don't have redundancy to survive a hit.
| dotancohen wrote:
| It should be noted that many species are occasionally hit
| at altitudes thought to be impossible for them to fly at.
|
| One notable example: https://news.alaskaair.com/alaska-
| airlines/flying-fish/
| marcosdumay wrote:
| Yeah, if I had to predict that kind of collision with
| fauna, I would fail.
| michaelcampbell wrote:
| > They are a well-known nemesis of military planes, that
| fly faster and don't have redundancy to survive a hit.
|
| Wait, military aircraft have LESS redundancy to survive
| "hits" than civil?
| mynegation wrote:
| Civil aircraft usually have at least two engines and
| military - usually one.
| grapesodaaaaa wrote:
| In this case, it should be easy to detect genetic or
| biological material if it was a meat sack strike & rule out
| space debris. They don't tend to do well when hit at several
| hundred mph.
|
| The only other thing really up that high would be space
| debris, weather balloon payload (the balloon itself is very
| thin and soft), or maybe a sounding rocket (but don't these
| come with NOTAMs?).
| jddj wrote:
| Go for a scroll up https://neal.fun/space-elevator/
| bronco21016 wrote:
| There are some other pictures circulating showing the exterior of
| the aircraft. It definitely appears something hit the aircraft.
| There is a skid mark on the frame around the window.[1]
|
| Will be interesting to read if an investigative report is made
| public.
|
| [1]https://viewfromthewing.com/new-cockpit-photos-may-show-
| what...
| fragmede wrote:
| Interesting, that link says it might just be hail.
| bronco21016 wrote:
| A lot doesn't add up from that article though. The writer
| mentions the window in question is the Captain's window. From
| the pictures, it appears to be the First Officer's window.
| Also, the writer mentions pock marks consistent with hail
| damage in other areas of the aircraft but I haven't found any
| images substantiating that.
|
| Hail is absolutely the most probably explanation, the article
| points to two other instances with similar outcomes. I think
| the doubt comes from the lack of evidence of hail or
| convective activity or other hail damage on the aircraft.
| Also, the pilot reportedly said he saw something coming at
| the aircraft.
| ecommerceguy wrote:
| Wasn't there a significant Starlink deorbiting recently?
| sipofwater wrote:
| "Something from "space" may have just struck a United Airlines
| flight over Utah" ""NTSB gathering radar, weather, flight
| recorder data."":
| https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/10/something-from-space-m...
| (arstechnica.com/space/2025/10/something-from-space-may-have-
| just-struck-a-united-airlines-flight-over-utah/)
| appreciatorBus wrote:
| ATC Audio here:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRM5zgE13_s
|
| EDIT: looks like the audio starts when they are already arriving
| at SLC
| JackAcid wrote:
| Dude's arm looks like scabs and I don't see anywhere that claims
| they are related to the impact.
| russdill wrote:
| Could this be from another plane on the same nav route but higher
| altitude?
| ErikCorry wrote:
| Classic Azimov plot line
| jbverschoor wrote:
| Out of all planes, it had to be the 737 max
| conradev wrote:
| On track to be the most popular model for US domestic travel,
| replacing the older 737s
| Stevvo wrote:
| My first guess would a bird. Bird strikes happen all the time;
| there are billions of birds. Next guess would be a drone; there
| are a lot more drones flying around than spacecraft.
| michaelcampbell wrote:
| At 36000'?
| fracus wrote:
| Isn't the speed of descent of objects falling out of orbit so
| great they usually burn up before hitting the ground, and
| wouldn't that speed cause them to easily penetrate into the
| interior of the plane?
| cdelsolar wrote:
| Anyone else think about that Asimov robot story with the
| "intuitive" robot "Jane"? She had discovered which stars were
| most likely to have planets around them with the right conditions
| for life and was flying back on an airplane with her human
| handler when it was hit by a meteorite.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-10-19 23:00 UTC)