I just found it interesting to hear what was being said.Also that liberties are taken with the scale of the animation.
I just found it interesting to hear what was being said.Also that liberties are taken with the scale of the animation.
Once of the factors investigated during aircraft collisions is how the struck aircraft appeared to the striking aircraft. How long was it visible? Where in the flight crew’s field of view was it visible? Relative to the striking aircraft, did it appear stationary or was it in motion?Why does that matter?
How hard would it be to add wingtip cameras for improved visibility? Backup cameras did wonders for car safety
According to NHTSA, hundreds annually, comparable to all of GA deaths. Still a small fraction of all traffic deaths so I retract my “wonders” comment. But I do think cameras would help in this sort of situation.uh huh. Annually, how many people were killed by car backing up?
do the math sometime...
I could only find data from the early 2000s and 1990s from the NHTSA, in which they stated that, "From 1991 to 2004, there is no definite trend in the number of fatalities, and it seems to hover in a range of 60-80 cases a year (averaging 76 cases per year in 1991 to 2004), with a slight downward trend (averaging 74 cases per year in the last 10 years from 1995 to 2004" (source: https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/nhtsa-2006-25579-0001-2.pdf, page 18). Even if it doubled between 2004 and 2024, that would still be a worst case scenario of 160 people dying per year. Considering the miniscule percentage of total deaths that represents, I doubt cameras moved the needle. Then again, I was taught to clear the back and front of my vehicle before moving it and currently neither of my regular drivers has a backup camera so I don't really view cameras as necessary to safely operate a vehicle.According to NHTSA, hundreds annually, comparable to all of GA deaths. Still a small fraction of all traffic deaths so I retract my “wonders” comment. But I do think cameras would help in this sort of situation.
I’m really splitting hairs here, but from the same link, page 10: “The current approach produces an estimate of at least 183 deaths due to backovers annually.” They talk about how the officially reported numbers are underestimated due to most accidents occurring in private parking lots, etc. I was also going by https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813363.pdf which reports 200-300 annually.I could only find data from the early 2000s and 1990s from the NHTSA, in which they stated that, "From 1991 to 2004, there is no definite trend in the number of fatalities, and it seems to hover in a range of 60-80 cases a year (averaging 76 cases per year in 1991 to 2004), with a slight downward trend (averaging 74 cases per year in the last 10 years from 1995 to 2004" (source: https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/nhtsa-2006-25579-0001-2.pdf, page 18).
I think it got extra traction because most of the victims of that sort of thing are small children who a) aren't easy or even possible to see, and b) don't always know any better when it comes to going behind cars.Continuing the sidetrack, when I first saw a proposed rule it stated that there were 200 deaths annually The proposal claimed an estimated 100 deaths would be prevented.
With annual sales of about ten million cars and an estimated cost of $200 per car, that’s a lot of money to spend to save 100 lives. Especially when the deaths could be prevented by people OPENING THEIR DANG EYES!!!!
My son backed into a car in a Target parking lot. Given the damage, he must have thought he was in a demolition derby. He tried to blame the accident on my 2007 without a camera!uh huh. Annually, how many people were killed by car backing up?...
And, while less important than lives saved, backup cameras also prevent a good bit of property damage and insurance claims caused by inattentive backing.I think it got extra traction because most of the victims of that sort of thing are small children who a) aren't easy or even possible to see, and b) don't always know any better when it comes to going behind cars.
I think it got extra traction because most of the victims of that sort of thing are small children who a) aren't easy or even possible to see, and b) don't always know any better when it comes to going behind cars.
How hard would it be to add wingtip cameras for improved visibility?
I’ve done s-turns on final. Controllers don’t always get the spacing right. As for monster straight ins, everyone is typically on IFR clearances and they all fly pretty much the same tracks.Heavy’s especially are handled with kid gloves. Monster straight ins, plenty of spacing (no need for s turns on final), no hurry off the runway, parking areas are big and clear, wing walkers there waiting on you. Other airplanes get out of your way, you don’t get out of theirs….
Ground is not directly responsible for keeping the airplanes from hitting each other. That responsibility lies strictly with each Pilot in Command. The controller is often a mile or so away and cannot determine separation with that much accuracy.I’d bet good money their mindset was since they were cleared to taxi that ground thought they were clear.
I mostly agree with this. But they get practice at close quarter taxing every time they pull into the gate.Doesn’t matter “it’s always pic fault blah blah blah”. It’s a catch all like conduct unbecoming in the military. Doesn’t get you an inch closer to determining WHY this happened. The root cause.
1. Poor training
2. Not kept proficient at close quarter taxiing
3. Over reliance on ground control
I don’t necessarily agree with this. That was nose to tail and it is always the Captain’s judgment how close to get to the plane in front.About #3. When that heavy capt was a Saab captain 30 years ago, he was told by ground a million times to snug it up… and only had another 20’ to use. No wonder he thought ground COULD tell if he was clear or not.
I’ve done s-turns on final. Controllers don’t always get the spacing right. As for monster straight ins, everyone is typically on IFR clearances and they all fly pretty much the same trackks.
Yep, but WHY did they have their head up their butt? That answer is one step closer.
You can stop there, make it illegal to have your head up a butt… but… it already is, didn’t seem to help in this case.
If you believe it was a simple one time non systemic event, that’s fine, then nothing is gonna help. Nothing to see here, move along.
I just happen to think it is a systemic problem (ain’t ANYWHERE near the first time) and there is a reasonable solution. That however requires admitting there is a flaw in the current environment. People responsible for the current environment will resist that possibility.
That’s administrative… but Ed (the head of deltas sms program) admitted in a deposition he hadn’t, as I recall.
Ever hear of TPS?
Because the controller screwed up the spacing? Preceding traffic slowed down unexpectedly? All kinds of reasons why that may be necessary.Why did you do s turns if you were all on the same track?
At airports the heavy aircraft use everyone pretty much flies the exact same ground tracks. They don’t have heavy only arrivals and heavies get tighter spacing than many smaller aircraft that have wake turbulence considerations. They also use the same taxiways and often the same gates.Or… wait for it… you could TRAIN THE PILOTS. Delta ain’t wasting any money taxiing around that plane for pilot training. He had some check airman point out a grease spot on the ramp as they were taxiing by say “that’s about where your wingtip is.” And that coulda been 15 years ago.
Heavy’s especially are handled with kid gloves. Monster straight ins, plenty of spacing (no need for s turns on final), no hurry off the runway, parking areas are big and clear, wing walkers there waiting on you. Other airplanes get out of your way, you don’t get out of theirs….
I’d bet good money their mindset was since they were cleared to taxi that ground thought they were clear.
Doesn’t matter “it’s always pic fault blah blah blah”. It’s a catch all like conduct unbecoming in the military. Doesn’t get you an inch closer to determining WHY this happened. The root cause.
1. Poor training
2. Not kept proficient at close quarter taxiing
3. Over reliance on ground control
About #3. When that heavy capt was a Saab captain 30 years ago, he was told by ground a million times to snug it up… and only had another 20’ to use. No wonder he thought ground COULD tell if he was clear or not.
Or… wait for it… you could TRAIN THE PILOTS. Delta ain’t wasting any money taxiing around that plane for pilot training. He had some check airman point out a grease spot on the ramp as they were taxiing by say “that’s about where your wingtip is.” And that coulda been 15 years ago.
I’m awake, bored, and salty at 2AM.