Hacker News Reader

Comment by fragmede | Hacker News Reader

Interesting, that link says it might just be hail.

A lot doesn't add up from that article though. The writer mentions the window in question is the Captain's window. From the pictures, it appears to be the First Officer's window. Also, the writer mentions pock marks consistent with hail damage in other areas of the aircraft but I haven't found any images substantiating that.

Hail is absolutely the most probably explanation, the article points to two other instances with similar outcomes. I think the doubt comes from the lack of evidence of hail or convective activity or other hail damage on the aircraft. Also, the pilot reportedly said he saw something coming at the aircraft.

Most journalists are pretty bad when it comes to covering aviation so I wouldn’t put much weight on the discrepancies. Half the time they can’t tell the difference between a jet and a Cessna 172. Seriously.

Reminds me of this gem:

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/6d/79/e9/6d79e9982b92c476e1d671f31...

Journalists are generally pretty bad at covering any technical topic, unless the journalist has some specific training in that topic, which is rare.

Indeed. As an engineer I ask an expert to review anything technical that I write (or program) for accuracy where I'm not an expert, but for some reason journalists don't do this. And so here we are.

> ...but for some reason journalists don't do this.

I imagine most journalists would love to have technical reviewers on their work, but there's no funding for it and there's pressure to churn content as quickly as possible. The specialized editors and fact checkers have been stripped away in the last few decades to create lean content mills.

My local papers can’t even publish without glaring spelling errors that would be highlighted in every editor that supports spell checking

>I imagine most journalists would love to have technical reviewers on their work, but there's no funding for it and there's pressure to churn content as quickly as possible.

well, so, we call these people what they are : tabloid writers.

journalists are the ones that take the time, effort, and cost to verify claims and rebroadcast perceived truths.

This is a bit of a "no true Scotsman" issue. Almost no one working as a journalist is given the resources to do that. Even if they have access to those resources, they don't necessarily have access to them for every story. And how are you supposed to become a senior journalist who has developed sources and gained enough trust/reputation to have resources invested in them - without being a junior journalist who is only given the leftover scraps?

A journalist deprived of resources might regress to what you call a tabloid writer, sure. But my issue is with framing it as a moral failing on their part, that they're too lazy or stupid or arrogant to get the facts right. Surely there are people like that, but it isn't most of them. This is a systemic issue. As a society we have failed to fund these activities.

The Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is always important to keep in mind.

I feel like a hail would cause a strong radar return that would have been noticed or at least documented by NEXRAD or onboard systems.

I’m sure the NTSB investigation will consider this angle, and we will find out eventually.

I was thinking it could be blue ice - leakage from another jet's waste holding tank.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_ice_(aviation)

Not too many commercial aircraft at > FL 360. They’d be hard to miss too.

Would hail form that high up? I thought any water would have frozen / solidified well below that height, it's -55 celsius up there.

Hail can be found higher than cruising altitude. Remember, it forms by riding updrafts in large storm clouds. Those updrafts don't stop blowing based on what's going on with the hail.

That said, I really doubt this was hail. The pilot is said to have seen something coming, which is probably why they are focused on a weather balloon payload now.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com