this post was submitted on 17 May 2024
313 points (93.6% liked)

News

23387 readers
2672 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Boeing 747-400 with 468 people aboard was forced to make an emergency landing in Indonesia on Wednesday after one of its engines caught fire and began shooting out flames during takeoff.

The Garuda Indonesia flight was bound for Medina, Saudi Arabia, which is the entry point for many Muslims making their pilgrimage to Mecca. It left from Indonesia’s international airport in Makassar, where clips showed one of the plane’s four engines becoming engulfed in flames during takeoff on Wednesday evening.

Videos of the engine fire were shared online by JACDEC, a plane crash data evaluation firm, which showed that the flames began just as the plane had lifted from the runway.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago (4 children)

completed an approximately 90-minute holding pattern before safely returning to and landing in Makassar.

Lol wtf!? I get that it was past the point of no return and had to commit to take off but a 90 min wait to land again seems insane.

[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 27 points 6 months ago (4 children)

747s are designed to lose an engine in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean and still be able to return to land safely. Literally.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS

90m isn't ideal, but perfectly fine.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's weird they designed it to lose an engine. They should have designed it not to lose an engine. That would have been better.

[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 0 points 6 months ago

(((THEY))) don't want that, though!!!!

[–] Dempf@lemmy.zip 3 points 6 months ago

Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim

[–] slacktoid@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Can we have other internet infrastructure built that way too?

[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Well, we have already.

The Internet was designed to be resilient against nuclear war. Most protocols are resilient, it's just been the last few years that some companies abused their positions (Cloudflare, Google) and it also came to light, that some protocols have been designed with a tad too much trust (BGP, SMTP).

[–] slacktoid@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

I am aware.. I meant more so with the recent trends.. We have p2p ffs. So its not the tech its how its being built.

[–] supercriticalcheese@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

ETOPS is not required for 747s. Being a 4 engine plane it can run fine with him three. So an engine failure is not an actual emergency although you will still need to land cause of the reduced performance running with three engines.

[–] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 17 points 6 months ago (1 children)

My guess is that they wanted the plane to use up most of the fuel before attempting the landing. As long as the plane is flying, the speed of the plane adds a level of safety to the fire. Once the plane lands and slows down, that fire would start affecting the rest of the wing much more, but there can't be a big kaboom anymore if the fuel tanks are empty.

[–] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 24 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Long distance 747 flighs usually take off above the maximum landng weight. They need to get rid of the fuel before landing, but the 400 has the ability to dump fuel.

The engine wasn't on fire. The engine had a surge on takeoff. They would have shut the engine off as it might have been damaged, but the plane was not on fire. They would have landed much sooner if it was.

Many articles describe engine surges with language that, while not technically a lie, is written to make readers conclude that the airplane is actually on fire.

[–] Dashi@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

This guy airplanes. Thanks for the info kind person!

[–] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Plane was not on fire. Passengers were in no immediate danger. Its safer to keep flying and prepare than make a hasty landing for no reason.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

Apparently the engine wasn't on fire either, falsely reported according to others here

[–] derf82@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

Landing overweight can be even more dangerous. The engine was shut down and they can fly just fine on 3 engines.