←back to thread

278 points Michelangelo11 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.2s | source
Show context
yellow_lead ◴[] No.45038691[source]
> Five engineers participated in the call, including a senior software engineer, a flight safety engineer and three specialists in landing gear systems, the report said.

I can't imagine the stress of being on this call as an engineer. It's like a production outage but the consequences are life and death. Of course, the pilot probably felt more stressed.

replies(9): >>45039254 #>>45039282 #>>45039409 #>>45039651 #>>45040107 #>>45040566 #>>45040768 #>>45041007 #>>45044206 #
airstrike ◴[] No.45039409[source]
I don't think there was ever a risk of the plane crashing with the pilot still in the cockpit, despite the fact that the headline sort of leads people to that conclusion.

The pilot could eject at any time. Still dangerous, but more of a debugging session to avoid other similar costly in the future than a Hollywood-like "if we don't solve this now the pilot dies"

replies(4): >>45039579 #>>45039607 #>>45039722 #>>45041508 #
chasil ◴[] No.45039722[source]
I imagine that ejecting at certain phases of these two attempts would not be survivable.

"The pilot then tried two “touch and go” landings, where the plane briefly lands, to try to straighten out the jammed nose gear, the report said."

replies(2): >>45040231 #>>45040602 #
nacnud ◴[] No.45040231[source]
According to the ejection seat manufacturer [1] there is no minimum height or speed at which the ejection seat can be used, so as long as the aircraft is roughly level then the ejection should be survivable.

[1] https://martin-baker.com/ejection-seats/us16e/

replies(2): >>45040587 #>>45040759 #
jefftk ◴[] No.45040759[source]
I would expect if the aircraft were level at 50 ft above the ground, flying inverted, an ejection would not be survivable.
replies(1): >>45040967 #
1. palata ◴[] No.45040967[source]
I assume it's what they meant with "as long as the aircraft is roughly level"...