What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Introducing DJ Hero Game view!
djhero.com - Scratch and mix 102 songs in 93 original mixes from today's hottest artists. Available Now.
80 Comments
- WorldLeader, on 06/02/2009, -1/+56May the crew and passengers rest in peace.
- rayskin, on 06/02/2009, -4/+31Over 200 people ***** died, show some respect.
- Haoie, on 06/02/2009, -1/+23No chance of survivors, sad.
- aimhelix, on 06/02/2009, -0/+20Condolences.
- asgardshill, on 06/02/2009, -5/+23I was going to say that I hope that Diggers will knock off the puerile "Lost" jokes now. But it looks like I was wrong.
- cosworth99, on 06/02/2009, -1/+18It takes a loooong time to fall from 10,000 metres. I really feel for the passengers and crew. Two minutes of sheer terror. The wreckage will be strewn over hundreds of square kilometers. I hope some families can find closure somehow. It's very human to bury someone. to not be able to do that final caring act is painful....
Here's to the recovery teams and their efforts. - renanrrinaldi, on 06/02/2009, -5/+19Enough with the Lost jokes!
- cosworth99, on 06/02/2009, -0/+13That plane had a serious and then attempteda turn back to Brazil. The automated text messages sent span over 4 minutes of data. There was something wrong on that plane and everyone knew it. From the time you knew you were in trouble until you hit the water it's terror.
I've been in a plane that lost cabin pressure. I wasn't unconscious in seconds. I froze my ass off though. I really can't describe how damn freaked you get when you aren't driving... - mraymond80, on 06/02/2009, -0/+12Condolences to the families & friends who lost loved ones...
- chockster, on 06/02/2009, -1/+13Not to sound insensitive, but I really want to know what happened. Automated alerts sent, but nothing from the pilots themselves? Weird. (No, I'm not saying this is terrorism, I'm not Fox News...)
I guess it will all be found out eventually. - PenguinChaser, on 06/02/2009, -0/+10One thought could be the plane depressurized knocking the pilots unconscious.
- victormach, on 06/02/2009, -0/+10May the crew and passengers rest in peace. This is truly a tragedy :(
- motivatedguy, on 06/02/2009, -0/+10R.I.P. I still believe there was a sudden and violent loss of cabin pressure. No distress call? No nothing?
- Thud, on 06/02/2009, -2/+10Small comfort, but if the plane lost pressurization like it's been mentioned in some reports, then everybody onboard would have been unconscious within seconds.
- avoge, on 06/02/2009, -2/+10The husband of one of my mom's friends was on that flight. Rest in peace.
- frostbyt, on 06/02/2009, -3/+11...and 115 people every day from car crashes. That is about 1 every 13 minutes.
Sometimes life sucks sometimes. - WestEast, on 06/02/2009, -0/+7Its hard to say, but in one way I'm glad they found the place, I would think that could help with relatives, and hopefully they can find the black box to shed some light on this sad event.
- americanoboy, on 06/02/2009, -7/+14i can just picture all the fat, sweaty mouth breathers sitting there with cheese and ketchup stains on their face trying to come up with a clever reference to lost and then furiously mashing the keyboard with their sausage-like fingers to share it with their white trash online friends.
- Spire3660, on 06/02/2009, -1/+8You were fine up until the white trash part. Basement dwelling, cheeto munching trolls come in all colors
- gasoline, on 06/02/2009, -0/+7A detailed meteorological analysis of the flight:
http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af447/ - DLit, on 06/02/2009, -0/+7so how would you know if no one mentioned it
- chockster, on 06/02/2009, -0/+6One thought: what automated warnings are there? Is there, for instance, an automated depressurization warning? What we've heard is that there were electrical warnings, but there's no mention of other warnings being received.
Anyone on Digg know this stuff? Like, actually know. Not "I use Flight Simulator and.." know. - asgardshill, on 06/02/2009, -0/+5Lots of speculation there with nothing to back it up. Let's wait until (hopefully) the FDRs are found and analyzed before pillorying Airbus for a design flaw when it could have been any number of things that caused the crash.
I for one would feel much safer flying on an Airbus A300 than say a Boeing 747.
http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/rate_mod.htm
Fatal Event Rate Per Million Flights
Airbus 330 = 1
Boeing 747 = 28 - DLit, on 06/02/2009, -0/+5what..the...*****?
- SynicalDan, on 06/02/2009, -0/+5And they thought TWA 800 was a difficult investigation.
- FuZi0nDET, on 06/02/2009, -0/+4They could have lost communication capabilities at some point after the electrical issues were detected. I don't know if it has been confirmed 100%, but I read a report that stated they did loose cabin pressure. I can only imagine how hard it would have been to fly a plane in the kind of storm they flew in, let alone with out cabin pressure, and a properly functioning air craft. They may not have had time to radio in, assuming they could.
Some guy on television was saying that the plane could also be too deep below the ocean for the location devices to work. - Austinh57, on 06/02/2009, -1/+5My girlfriend was on a flight to Germany from the U.S. around the time that this plane went down. It makes me feel even worse for the families suffering right now to know that any plane could have gone down during the storm. Horrible disaster.
- Napiertt, on 06/02/2009, -0/+3Yeah, I saw that theory. We really won't know until the FDRs are recovered.
- DLit, on 06/02/2009, -0/+3I'll kill you
- asgardshill, on 06/02/2009, -0/+3Because not doing so would ensure that only blogspam, pro-marijuana articles, Pedobear stories and web comics made it to the front page. ***** will be ***** no matter the content posted, and stories like this one draw them out allowing you to block them..
- plexo66, on 06/03/2009, -0/+2Plane do just breakup from turbulance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BOAC_Flight_911 here is a picture of it falling apart http://rgilder0.tripod.com/theairlines/boac911fall ...
- ViscidGobs, on 06/03/2009, -0/+2No way man, UFO's couldn't pull off something so complex, it had to be a sasquatch.
- inactive, on 06/02/2009, -0/+2clearly ... they should know UFO's refuel inside of storms
dumb pilot flew right into it's anti-gravity field - imthescatman, on 06/02/2009, -3/+5from one of the best aviation experts on the net:
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2009/06/02/ask ... - DankBuddz, on 06/03/2009, -0/+2Nothing on earth makes me happier to know that I am nothing like you.
- DankBuddz, on 06/03/2009, -0/+2Well that's somewhat comforting.
- scgirl212, on 06/03/2009, -0/+1The important part is that there is NO way to manually override the computer. Its what happened in the Hudson River one. When the birds got sucked into the engines the computer took that as a fail and shut down the power. There is no way to reboot manually. Stuff like this can be avoided if there is a manual override as an option.
You can fly it manually (meaning turn it) but when the computer decides there is a problem due to failure it shuts it off and there is no way to override that.
We don't call it "scarebus" in the airline industry for nothing.
I'm a 30+ year flight attendant and my husband is a 30+ year pilot. For Continental. - Hedison, on 06/03/2009, -0/+1I hope it was quick. Terribly tragic
- imthescatman, on 06/05/2009, -0/+1The airbus that crash landed into the hudson was struck by birds in both of its engines which destroyed the turbines in the engine itself. It really has nothing to do with being able to start the engines again. "Scarebus" is just a term used by boeing fanboys (your husband included probably because he works for Continental) and really has no substance. Planes crash and fail. Whether it's made by Boeing or Airbus, they don't always work right. The Airbus is a very sophisticated aircraft and is extremely safe. What you are describing is not correct. Pilots do have the ability to override the computer and they do if need be. You may be referring to some issues they had with the computers when they first released the A320 but those have all been fixed since 1988 when it was delivered.
- xaeon, on 06/03/2009, -0/+1You said that there were 28 fatal events per million flights. It's actually 0.76 per million. That, as I said, is VERY wrong. You also said the Airbus A330 had 1 fatal event per million flights. That too is very wrong, as you have no actual data for the amount of flights that the Airbus A330 has performed.
You quoted from the source link incorrectly. That is why you got it very very wrong.
And as I said, without a proper reference to the actual amount of flights the Aibus A330 has performed, the data is meaningless.
YOU were the one who used that data to back up YOUR claim that the Airbus A330 was safer than a Boeing 747. - Ogopogo, on 06/03/2009, -0/+1.. no, you're not likely to be 'unconcious within seconds'. Yes, there's little oxygen in the outside air, but the plane is probably loosing altitude fast and the drop-down oxygen masks might have deployed.
- DankBuddz, on 06/03/2009, -0/+1Its okay, I won't care when you die either.
- jpop, on 06/03/2009, -0/+1I hope they can find the black box and it is intact. It might be the only way to know what happened for sure.
- Nothlit, on 06/02/2009, -0/+1That the cardinal rule for in-flight emergencies is "aviate, navigate, communicate," in that order. The pilots could very well have been so preoccupied trying to keep the plane in the air and figuring out which way to turn for an emergency landing that they simply didn't get the chance to make any radio calls before it was too late. Besides, it's not like there's much that air traffic control can do for you when you are hundreds of miles out over the ocean. (That's why "communicate" is last on the list.)
- Latentk, on 06/03/2009, -0/+1That site was incredible. That person really did their homework. I enjoyed your enlightening read, thanks!
- photogger, on 06/02/2009, -0/+1Hmmmm didn't think about it that way.....good point.
- HentaiJeff, on 06/02/2009, -2/+3respect for the dead? on MY digg?
- xero9, on 06/03/2009, -0/+1According to what I've read on an aviation site, they were outside of your standard communications zone. Apparently there are a few spots where they can only transmit on a certain type of radio wave (I want to say VH), and apparently takes several minutes sometimes to get a response from ATC, so the speculation is they were probably trying to deal with their situation over trying to waste time contacting ATC for something they couldn't assist with anyway
-
Show 51 - 84 of 84 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 