Hacker News Reader

Comment by gnatman | Hacker News Reader

There’s a video posted elsewhere in this discussion [0].

Looks like the plane landed incredibly hard and the gear buckled. Extreme wind shear?

[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1is1qoy/video_of_...

That post was removed by the /r/aviation mods so (at least on mobile) it can't be viewed directly on the new UI. But if you switch to old.reddit.com it's still there.

> Looks like the plane landed incredibly hard and the gear buckled. Extreme wind shear?

Quality is not good enough to tell for sure, but to me, looks like wind shear causing a tail strike followed by gear buckling

the Navy pilot jokes showed up fast in that thread

That link seems to have been taken down by reddit mods now.

Thanks for the link.

Yes, that's technically video I guess, but it's trash and doesn't look like the camera was set up to capture takeoffs and landings. More like a utility shed and road... at '90s webcam frame rates and quality.

Hahah, wow, who was offended by those easily-verified observations?

They're obvious hyperbole complaining about how you can't immediately have access to high res, high frame rate footage of a disaster with casualties.

Maybe people think you are kind of creepy for being so insistent (and hyperbolically so)?

What are you talking about? I merely criticized THIS shitty footage, which is so poor that you can't tell what happened to the plane. Useless.

Maybe you're replying to the wrong person. Otherwise, the only hyperbolic statement is your own.

Any such cameras would have to be operating in a full range of weather, temperature, and lighting conditions, and would need to have power/data infrastructure run out to it around/under runways. Plus you'd need dozens of the things, all of the networking infrastructure to support them.....this isn't going to come out looking like Hollywood. Have you ever worked with security cameras or footage anywhere?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com