Hacker News Reader

Comment by mackman | Hacker News Reader

Story time. In the last total eclipse, I was commuting from Boston to San Francisco a bunch and planned my flight to coincide with the path of totality. I brought enough eclipse glasses for the entire flight. The flight attendants were kind enough to distribute them and even gave them to the pilot and copilot. The flight crew was excited about it and actually got approval a change to their flight plan so that they could bank the plane so that people on both sides of the plane could actually look out the window to see the eclipse. This is back in the days of Virgin America, and as a thank you they sent me a little desk statue of a Virgin America plane. I keep it on my desk in fond memory of my favorite airline. Also got some cool photos of the flight crew and passengers all wearing eclipse glasses. (https://mackman.net/va.jpg)

View on HN

Banking the plane for people to see is a safety thing.

If people think they won't get a chance to see, they might all crowd to one side of the plane, causing enough weight imbalance so as to cause a crash.

It's a big problem on boats, and there are countless stories of someone on a crowded boat seeing a dolphin, shouting about it, everyone crowds to one side to get closer, and the whole boat capsizes.

Regulations now require that boats stay afloat if everyone stands on one side, but the regulations aren't perfectly adhered to and that still doesn't prevent people crowding to one side enough to push/knock others overboard.

That explains why they had to get approval.

Flight plan approval was because controllers and airlines are expecting you to travel on a straight line between points, and not fly circles unexpectedly in controlled airspace.

>If people think they won't get a chance to see, they might all crowd to one side of the plane, causing enough weight imbalance so as to cause a crash.

This gives me an idea. Introducing, the Brennan airplane (see: 7:20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUYzuAJeg3M)

That's an even bigger issue if it's a Polish plane, you don't want too many poles on the right side of the plane.

You monster. Have an upvote.

Came here for this... wasn't disappointed. Thank you for ensuring control stability.

I know I’m gonna get along with someone if they make or understand this joke.

Just one pole on the right side will take a plane down

Im sad to admit I'm Polish born and don't understand this joke.

It's a math/engineering joke. A control system is considered unstable if there is a pole (a mathematical singularity, not Polish person) on the right side of the plane (the complex plane of the Laplace transform of its closed loop transfer function, not an airplane).

I figured. But even as a mechanical engineering grad I didn't really make the association with a pole of some sort all on one side of the plane.

That’s ridiculous.

Banking the plane is a nice gesture to help everyone experience a special occasion.

>> causing enough weight imbalance so as to cause a crash.

So I was on a flight from London to Vancouver, which had us approaching Vancouver from the north. It was December but a sunny day. Half the passengers were on ski holidays. We had to delay our arrival a while so the pilot said he was going to bank the plane to the left and do a circle, which would put the Whistler-Blackcomb ski resort in view out the left side. In unison, seatbelts be damned, everyone on the right of the plane got up and moved left to get pictures. About half-way through the turn, the pilot came back: "Um, we felt that up here. When you return to your seats can you please do so slowly, at least slower than how fast you moved to the left." Pre-9/11 was a simpler time.

I took a sightseeing flight around Mt Everest (within the last year). The flight crew explicitly told everyone to move to one side of the plane while we were in the air.

I doubt everyone moving side to side when the plane isn’t taking off or landing is going to automatically cause a crash.

Not a crash, but having a few thousand pounds of cargo shift from side to side will be noticed. But what can actually cause a crash is moving front-to-back. Shift 200 people, say 40,000lbs of cargo, front to back can disrupt the cg enough to cause real trouble.

Banking the plane is a convenience thing.

Side to side weight balance of passengers is not a major factor in any plane I have ever read the manual for. They are too close to the centerline to impart much force. The pilots might notice it and trim it out, but I doubt they would have to do anything beyond that. Fore and aft balance is critical, but still unlikely to be an issue with passengers at cruise speed since the elevator has a lot of control authority at 500mph.

A 737 can fly fine with a completely empty wing tank on one side and a completely full wing tank on the other. The wing tanks of some models can carry 4,500 kgs of fuel in each side, so that amounts to a 9,000 kg imbalance outboard of the fuselage. That is the equivalent of about 111 "standard" passengers' weight on the wing that can be handled with trim alone, and 737s are capable of safely landing in that configuration.

Boats are different because as they heal farther and farther the righting moment diminishes (for conventional monohull powercraft at least), and the passengers are able to get all the way to the extreme.

Planes on the other hand have the same "righting moment" no matter how far over they bank since it is a function of airflow over control surfaces rather than buoyancy and gravity.

> everyone crowds to one side to get closer, and the whole boat capsizes.

Sounds like it might be something that they should tell people about, I guess they don't because when there's enough people in an airplane people either tend to (1) behave according to rules or (2) just not be a significant amount of people to cause the plane to {{do funny things}}.

...but in any case, I can imagine being a pilot and hoping/trying to/prayin for people to stay in their seat regardless of whatever is happening outside...

...must be a scary experience...

That's a great story. I was on a flight during the eclipse of 2021. It was hard to see the eclipse from the plane, you had to lie down on the floor and look up thru the window. You were very lucky for the pilot to bank the plane.

Anyway, stories like this where strangers help everyone around them experience something great always warm my heart. Kudos to you!

That is so cool, honestly you have probably contributed to a core memory of everyone on that flight... Really no words.

Paula Poundstone: Pshk - people on the left... We HATE the people on the right. We are purposefully flying so you guys see all the cool stuff out your window...

RIP Virgin America :(

How did you explain the hundreds of pairs of glasses to TSA?

I explained what they were for :-)

Any worry about counterfeit glasses? I recall during the last eclipse it was a bit tricky: product detail pages would often list some ISO numbers or whatever, but no reason to trust that, so instead you could find a short list of manufacturer names on some highly reputable website (maybe a government or health site?) but then don't use Amazon due to the commingling problem...

https://eclipse.aas.org/eye-safety/viewers-filters

And buy direct, don't use Amazon because of the counterfeit risks.

I got these that purport to be from the company's official store. Am I dead? https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06ZZPRB7L

Commingled inventory; maybe.

Because of commingling, anything shipped by amazon might be a fake, even if the seller is legit. Basically if two people (claim to) sell the same product, they get thrown in the same bin in Amazon's warehouse. When you order it you get whatever the worker happens to pick from that bin. Amazon can track it internally by the labels, but have little inclination to do so.

Ah hell. Good thing I have time to order different ones. These guys are legit, right? https://www.rainbowsymphony.com/

Yeah, I did worry. I told the flight crew people were at their own risk. I don't remember where I bought them from. Might have been B&H photo which sells their own branded ones in bags of 100 cheap. Maybe from aas.org. It's been a long time.

<3 B&H. Finding them was a breath of fresh air given how garbage Newegg has become.

B&H absolutely has their own problems. About a decade+ ago I thought they were also my savior from newegg, whom I really dislike.

They are often pulling stuff like this, tax evasion, LOTS of discrimination complaints, etc https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-owned-bh-photo-accused-...

Their return policy isn't great by any means. I buy a $2000 49" Monitor that arrives not working and I can't return it because I opened and tried to turn it on? Yeah, ok.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/find/HelpCenter/ReturnExchange....

> Nonreturnable Items

Opened TVs, combos and monitors 37" and larger — original packaging cannot be unsealed Opened computers and computer software — original packaging cannot be unsealed Electronic software downloads Opened consumable items (e.g., film, tapes, paper, bulbs, CD, DVDs, ink cartridges, etc.) Any computers built or modified by B&H to customer specifications Select special-order merchandise, or any item indicated on the website as nonreturnable Underwater equipment that has been submerged Opened or unwrapped educational tapes and books

> Their return policy isn't great by any means. I buy a $2000 49" Monitor that arrives not working and I can't return it because I opened and tried to turn it on? Yeah, ok.

I know some consumer protection laws aren’t as strong as others – I’m blessed to live in Australia in this regard – but surely this just isn’t legal?

I suspect they didn't say "you're SOL", they probably said "file a warranty claim".

Retail stores aren't usually on the hook for items that arrive non-functioning from the manufacturer -- the manufacturer is.

Bestbuy etc take opened items like that back up to 30 days. I think it used to be much longer in the past but I would 100% expect to be able to return a dead tv/monitor/electronic of any sort to a big box store take my broken item back even if I opened it and plugged it in to use it.

I rarely buy from box stores but when I do that and being able to test things in person is the only reason I ever go near a bestbuy/etc.

Microcenter for instance- https://community.microcenter.com/kb/articles/28-what-is-the...

> Products not eligible for return *

Opened software such as Microsoft Office, Microsoft Windows, Microsoft Windows Server, and Microsoft Windows Server clients Electronic software downloads Point of Sale Activation Cards that have a dollar value Micro Center Gift Cards (except as required by law) Products with customer-induced damage such as, but not limited to, aerial drones with damage due to pilot error. So let’s be careful out there! Microphones and microphone accessories * VR Headsets, Headphones, including AirPods, Earbuds, and Over-the-Ear Products

* Hardware items deemed defective are eligible for exchange

Which is bad, from a consumer protection perspective.

The retailer should absolutely be on the hook. They are the ones with a working relationship with the manufacturer, and hence are best positioned to be able to hold the manufacturer accountable.

As an Australian who lives in the US atm, they are right to be grateful for the ACCC (consumer protection watchdog). I certainly am now. In the US you have to rely on retailers who treat good consumer protection as a competitive advantage like Costco, REI, Best Buy, sometimes Amazon, etc. In Australia you can easily hold any retailer accountable (and they’re all just generally better behaved with this stuff anyway, so you rarely have to force them).

> In the US you have to rely on retailers who treat good consumer protection as a competitive advantage

For the most part, credit card chargebacks serve a similar purpose, though of course the retailer may ban you from their store afterwards.

Absolutely agreed that the retailer is on the hook. The customer is not making a deal with the manufacturer to buy the good; the customer is making a deal with the retailer. Along the same line, I dislike it when retailers try to weasel out of shipping issues by blaming it on the parcel carrier. That's only valid if the customer went to ups.com and created and paid for a shipment themselves!

> Retail stores aren't usually on the hook for items that arrive non-functioning from the manufacturer -- the manufacturer is.

One of the great things about Australian consumer law: the retail store is responsible.

> LOTS of discrimination complaints

> A US Labor Department lawsuit filed in 2016 accused B&H, the largest non-chain photo and video equipment store in New York City, of heavily discriminating against Hispanic employees by forcing them to use separate, unsanitary bathrooms.

Man, I had no idea. Forcing an ethnic group to use separate bathrooms? Whoever thought that was a good idea?

Crap. Guess it's Microcenter.

newegg shipped me six 16TB hard drives that were garbage. Some looked like a claw hammer ripped through their soft aluminum shells. Some had no connectors.

I actually just did some clicking through from the AAS vendor list that smashed offered, and B&H certainly has a strong entry in the reputable-and-cheap category! Less than $1/ea [0].

[0] https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1750791-REG/american_...

Do you have to? They're legal products for a national flight, what would the TSA want with that?

You might have to if they look sufficiently weird on the scan. But your end of the conversation is unlikely to be much more involved than "Yeah, that's my bag", "It's a bunch of eclipse viewing glasses".

I once brought a carry on full of random electronics/cables, including a partially disassembled desktop power supply in a "custom made modular plastic enclosure" (read: box made out of Legos, complete with a Lego door for the cables to pass through). To make matters worse I was in a rush while packing so the cables were a huge tangled mess.

They flagged it for further inspection, unsurprisingly, but the agent was pretty amicable, I didn't really get any grief

I don't like how normalized it is to ask "how did you explain sunglasses in your luggage to the police?".

Too totalitarian for me.

Isn't it the reality that's too totalitarian? Should we deny the reality? That seems even more insidious.

That's my point, that the reality is too totalitarian.

You're misrepresenting the issue.

Have one bottle of Sudafed in your luggage and nobody will care. Have 100 bottles of Sudafed and you're going to jail for drug manufacturing.

Oh sorry, you're right, I'm misrepresenting the issue. What's the LD50 for sunglasses again?

"I'm the sort of kid who brought enough chewing gum for everyone in the class."

Hah, well, yeah. I did learn in high school that if brought Starbucks to the front office staff and my first period teacher nobody ever marked me tardy :-P

That was an important (and transferrable!) life lesson learned. :)

That having enough money lets you get away with things?

That being nice to people gets you farther than being a dickweed.

Yeah, you need the money, but you also have to do the thing. Useful lesson.

But is it compatible with the Categorical Imperative?

Oh my god, critiquing pure reason is so 300 years ago.

I find such investments often have unexpected returns. At worst, I did something nice for someone.

I know you're being snarky, but yes. Having money and being genuinely generous towards people will put you on good terms with them. Just like being nice and polite and friendly and considerate, same thing.

"Is it dangerous? Then mind your goddamn business."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com