What the heck? I was literally just reading about the Cornfield Bomber yesterday! I guess somebody else read the question on Aviation StackExchange [0] asking what autopilots are programmed to do upon pilot ejection.
Another very interesting case of a plane flying after the pilot ejected happened with a Soviet MiG-23 in 1989, which flew from Poland to Belgium, before crashing into a house and killing a man [1]. The map of its flightpath is interesting [2], imagine being one of the F-15 pilots that intercepted it. It would be nerve wracking having to intercept a plane heading straight into NATO airspace, and then completely bizarre when you discovered there was no pilot on it.
I scan HN fairly extensively (if sometimes quickly).
There's a fair amount of OP's that pretty apparently start when someone takes a resource cited in a comment and makes a new top-level post out of it.
I don't keep track of who and what. I just see a new post and think/remember, I saw that in a comment 3 hours ago - 1 day ago. (Sometimes, quicker than that.)
The behavior doesn't seem to be overwhelming HN (maybe the moderators throttle it?), and often significant conversations seem to ensue, so, as they say, "what the hey..."
There does seem to be a tendency on HN for there to end up being a series of stories on a particular topic.
One person will post a link, then somebody who reads the linked article will do some further reading, discover something interesting, and then post a link to their interesting discovery to HN, and the cycle continues.
I rather like it. It happens at a low enough level, as you mentioned, that it provides a nice stream of information on a particular topic.
I like it too. I tend to be the only person in my close circle who finds HN-type content interesting, so it’s fun to go on a tangent and then see what others who went on the same tangent think.
It would be nice to capture those reply chains and package up a bunch of related links at once. Kind of like a shared mapping of our unexpected deep internet dives on Wikipedia, just automated.
My old Chief Flying instructor was a test pilot in the RAF back in the 50's and 60's. He has many stories about pilots who ejected from their 'out of control' jets only to hang in their parachutes a minute later watching their aircraft flying along perfectly normally.
His opinion was that most planes have a better idea how to stabilise than the pilot does, and in fact when taking us through emergency recovery manoeuvres in the air, he used to suggest in most cases the first reaction should be "hands off stick and throttle" (obviously only where altitude and time permitted) just to see if the airplane would self correct, before applying any inputs ourselves.
In the armed forces, there is usually a hearing to find out the cause/reason. If it is due to pilot error, then I think demotion or transfer to non flying duties is usually the punishment.
Although I remember many years ago when a RAAF Macchi jet crashed here during a training exercise. It was found that pilot error was the cause of the incident, and the instructor & student I believe lost their flying status, but there was a concerted campaign by a old lady in the city where the crew were based to get them to pay for the lost jet via garnishing their wages. I don't think she got her wish.
Well, to be fair, this was back in the 70's or 80's, and the little Macchi back then would have had a 'fly away' price from the lot at probably about $1million - but still, more than a lifetime's wages back in the day, even for an Air Force flight instructor! :D
Oh, I dunno. I bet it's possible to fabricate an airworthy airframe of identical external appearance, and power it with cheap engines that are permit the same capablities of subsonic speeds, for much cheaper.
But, it obviously couldn't fly in a warzone. It'd be missing all of its expensive radar absorbing material, valious fly-by-wire avionics and electronic countermeasures, it'd be hot on thermal imaging, very loud and noisy, and it couldn't haul half of a B-52's armament and payload, and it'd probably lack the range and durability of a military war plane.
But. You could do fly-bys at air shows, and everyone would be just as impressed.
I have to figure, it might be possible to put something that looks (and maybe, in an engine-out glide, sounds) like a B-2 in the air for on ten-thousandth of the cost. So maybe, with budget of 20 legit bombers, you could manufacture 200,000 defective twins with the same visual impact?
Author is just being cute. No automation at all was involved, simply a naturally stable system and a fair amount of good luck. (Before fly-by-wire and computers all aircraft had to be at least neutrally stable, or they would be literally unflyable.)
It wasn't actually that rare an occurrence; I've heard at least a dozen Cold War stories, all verified, of self-landers. Danish Hunter serial 415 was probably the most famous, it flew itself pilotless down the approach at Skrydstrup and landed beside the runway.
More morbid was the WW2 92 Sqn Spitfire that nearly made it back to its home airfield with a dead pilot at the controls. It landed in treetops near Biggin Hill after flying all the way back from France where he had been killed.
Aliquam et auctor enim. Etiam semper lectus sit amet elementum pretium. Integer porttitor facilisis augue et feugiat. Duis vulputate, dui nec malesuada faucibus, dui purus condimentum est, sit amet egestas enim mauris ut orci. Maecenas hendrerit bibendum tempor. Proin nec dictum ex. Ut velit odio, porttitor non pellentesque a, finibus eget neque. Duis eu dui felis. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Nunc ultrices mauris eget nunc egestas malesuada.
Maecenas iaculis, magna et pharetra semper, sapien purus placerat turpis, pretium convallis nulla nunc a lectus. Sed accumsan vestibulum urna, ut ultrices sapien pellentesque a. Maecenas fermentum libero vitae ultricies eleifend. Pellentesque imperdiet ligula sed mauris semper pharetra. Vivamus nec consequat libero. Mauris et aliquam nulla. Nulla turpis leo, fringilla a nisl eu, hendrerit rutrum nibh. Pellentesque ex quam, egestas vitae ipsum at, laoreet accumsan eros. Pellentesque ornare at lacus et commodo. Morbi ut sodales dui.
Quisque elementum massa quam, non consequat risus laoreet sit amet. In vitae libero commodo, feugiat lacus et, sodales libero. Suspendisse tempus metus ut molestie ultricies. Quisque dignissim ut nulla ac lacinia. Ut laoreet hendrerit erat, et congue massa sollicitudin quis. Suspendisse nec dictum tellus, ac pellentesque libero. Donec non eleifend ex. Ut at mi sapien. Nullam eget velit sem.
Aenean mi nunc, iaculis sit amet accumsan nec, sagittis ut enim. Interdum et malesuada fames ac ante ipsum primis in faucibus. In justo nulla, dignissim ut felis a, venenatis vestibulum turpis. Phasellus congue, elit ut luctus ullamcorper, nunc ligula egestas risus, at tempor mauris est pellentesque purus. Aliquam scelerisque eget dolor porta rhoncus. Nam luctus ut augue vitae luctus. Mauris eros sem, congue nec elit nec, tincidunt interdum lacus. Pellentesque imperdiet lectus libero, at dignissim odio elementum et. Vestibulum pretium, lacus maximus placerat tincidunt, augue quam scelerisque est, a facilisis sapien libero eu enim. Etiam pretium, metus eu ultricies tempus, mauris nunc sollicitudin lacus, in viverra massa sem in odio. Maecenas sed urna sit amet ipsum tempus molestie. Sed in justo ac velit dictum pulvinar. Mauris dictum lectus ipsum, id sodales massa facilisis sed. Fusce vestibulum nibh urna, eget pretium odio egestas quis.
Integer nec enim vel turpis efficitur volutpat. Fusce iaculis, libero vitae tristique egestas, risus tortor vehicula lorem, ut sollicitudin lorem magna iaculis libero. Praesent tincidunt justo id sapien rutrum, et maximus arcu venenatis. Mauris ac lacus magna. Curabitur blandit lectus a ex varius pellentesque. Pellentesque ut risus porta odio tempus condimentum. Phasellus id arcu tortor. Proin ante lorem, rutrum et libero id, venenatis pretium nisl. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Vestibulum rutrum ligula nec bibendum ultrices.
Suspendisse potenti. Phasellus non convallis mi. Vivamus egestas suscipit orci in hendrerit. Curabitur in ullamcorper eros, eu vulputate est. Curabitur sit amet ipsum quis purus malesuada aliquet. Cras et consectetur sem. Donec et nisl justo. Sed ut libero eu lectus eleifend porttitor. Duis pellentesque leo leo, a dapibus orci sollicitudin et. Donec sed quam quis dolor bibendum pellentesque. Nunc fringilla lectus nec pulvinar molestie. Pellentesque leo nibh, interdum quis lacus quis, ultrices pretium augue. Curabitur malesuada scelerisque sem, vel dapibus enim congue vel. Sed sed lacus odio. Fusce imperdiet massa ut tincidunt varius. Nam a nibh sed leo sodales commodo sed rutrum orci.
Integer ullamcorper mauris vitae feugiat viverra. Sed mollis dictum mauris, ut commodo ante placerat eu. Phasellus ut libero vel ante dapibus semper nec id ligula. Vestibulum in vestibulum neque, in aliquet sem. Morbi varius ac dolor vel semper. Duis lacinia urna turpis, in molestie augue varius vel. Nullam eleifend tellus ut elit porttitor, ut elementum eros sollicitudin. Maecenas quis luctus dolor. Maecenas fermentum sed diam non iaculis. Nulla sceleri...
Am i the only one who is irritated by sentences like "In 1970, a plane got fed up with its pilot so it hatched an audacious plan. First, get rid of the pilot. Second: land. Third: enter history. The result was amazing."
Especially irritating the the last sentence "The result was amazing".
Is there a word for describing this type of writing in English?
That was my first reaction to. But it isn't clickbait as you ware already reading the article, you could of course argue it baits you into reading on.
As I see you can split the question/answer in two, first the anthropomorphising of the plane and the events that happened. And second, something I see a lot on sites like "Hack a day", seems to me like the need to add more to the story, because the journalist otherwise cannot justify publishing it as a story. As it would only be a summary of the events already documented in the sources.
To me it generally came across as "self-indulgent" where authors write for themselves more than the readers. Cynically I can just imagine the author thinking "oh yes that's clever" while writing this part... And with AI in the media these days, it may just confuse readers. And for what, to fit in some fancy anthropomorphism?
But I don't think I'm using the term quite right, this seems to be a more specific issue in fiction.
This has happened many times in civilian aviation as well, many times with the pilots still inside but incapacitated.
I remember one famous story of a doctor in a beechcraft who passed out from hypoxia -- only to awaken hours later by the jarring of the airplane bouncing along in a cornfield. The plane's autopilot had kept the wings level until it ran out of gas. Then it slowly descended into a field.
What a story that guy had to tell! I wonder if he flew very much after that.
im surprised that the mission even took place seeing that one of the pilots had to ditch his jet on the runway. different times i guess, but i doubt that the sortie would continue as normal today.
44 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 98.5 ms ] threadAnother very interesting case of a plane flying after the pilot ejected happened with a Soviet MiG-23 in 1989, which flew from Poland to Belgium, before crashing into a house and killing a man [1]. The map of its flightpath is interesting [2], imagine being one of the F-15 pilots that intercepted it. It would be nerve wracking having to intercept a plane heading straight into NATO airspace, and then completely bizarre when you discovered there was no pilot on it.
[0] https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/52862/if-a-pilo...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Belgian_MiG-23_crash
[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20120426041634/http://images3.we...
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17391550
There's a fair amount of OP's that pretty apparently start when someone takes a resource cited in a comment and makes a new top-level post out of it.
I don't keep track of who and what. I just see a new post and think/remember, I saw that in a comment 3 hours ago - 1 day ago. (Sometimes, quicker than that.)
The behavior doesn't seem to be overwhelming HN (maybe the moderators throttle it?), and often significant conversations seem to ensue, so, as they say, "what the hey..."
One person will post a link, then somebody who reads the linked article will do some further reading, discover something interesting, and then post a link to their interesting discovery to HN, and the cycle continues.
I rather like it. It happens at a low enough level, as you mentioned, that it provides a nice stream of information on a particular topic.
His opinion was that most planes have a better idea how to stabilise than the pilot does, and in fact when taking us through emergency recovery manoeuvres in the air, he used to suggest in most cases the first reaction should be "hands off stick and throttle" (obviously only where altitude and time permitted) just to see if the airplane would self correct, before applying any inputs ourselves.
Although I remember many years ago when a RAAF Macchi jet crashed here during a training exercise. It was found that pilot error was the cause of the incident, and the instructor & student I believe lost their flying status, but there was a concerted campaign by a old lady in the city where the crew were based to get them to pay for the lost jet via garnishing their wages. I don't think she got her wish.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_B-2_Spirit#Ac...
But, it obviously couldn't fly in a warzone. It'd be missing all of its expensive radar absorbing material, valious fly-by-wire avionics and electronic countermeasures, it'd be hot on thermal imaging, very loud and noisy, and it couldn't haul half of a B-52's armament and payload, and it'd probably lack the range and durability of a military war plane.
But. You could do fly-bys at air shows, and everyone would be just as impressed.
I have to figure, it might be possible to put something that looks (and maybe, in an engine-out glide, sounds) like a B-2 in the air for on ten-thousandth of the cost. So maybe, with budget of 20 legit bombers, you could manufacture 200,000 defective twins with the same visual impact?
You probably get classed unfit to fly until medical exam.
If you were flying one of the 60s fast jets you may lose a kneecap on the way out.
Then you get the enquiry/court martial.
[0] http://martin-baker.com/ejection-tie-club/
So I opened it on my actual iphone. adguard blocked all of the ads.
http://aviadejavu.ru/Site/Arts/Art9093.htm
More morbid was the WW2 92 Sqn Spitfire that nearly made it back to its home airfield with a dead pilot at the controls. It landed in treetops near Biggin Hill after flying all the way back from France where he had been killed.
Give me a billion dollars and send me to the moon so i can get a fucking blowjob ya cunts
Maecenas iaculis, magna et pharetra semper, sapien purus placerat turpis, pretium convallis nulla nunc a lectus. Sed accumsan vestibulum urna, ut ultrices sapien pellentesque a. Maecenas fermentum libero vitae ultricies eleifend. Pellentesque imperdiet ligula sed mauris semper pharetra. Vivamus nec consequat libero. Mauris et aliquam nulla. Nulla turpis leo, fringilla a nisl eu, hendrerit rutrum nibh. Pellentesque ex quam, egestas vitae ipsum at, laoreet accumsan eros. Pellentesque ornare at lacus et commodo. Morbi ut sodales dui.
Quisque elementum massa quam, non consequat risus laoreet sit amet. In vitae libero commodo, feugiat lacus et, sodales libero. Suspendisse tempus metus ut molestie ultricies. Quisque dignissim ut nulla ac lacinia. Ut laoreet hendrerit erat, et congue massa sollicitudin quis. Suspendisse nec dictum tellus, ac pellentesque libero. Donec non eleifend ex. Ut at mi sapien. Nullam eget velit sem.
Aenean mi nunc, iaculis sit amet accumsan nec, sagittis ut enim. Interdum et malesuada fames ac ante ipsum primis in faucibus. In justo nulla, dignissim ut felis a, venenatis vestibulum turpis. Phasellus congue, elit ut luctus ullamcorper, nunc ligula egestas risus, at tempor mauris est pellentesque purus. Aliquam scelerisque eget dolor porta rhoncus. Nam luctus ut augue vitae luctus. Mauris eros sem, congue nec elit nec, tincidunt interdum lacus. Pellentesque imperdiet lectus libero, at dignissim odio elementum et. Vestibulum pretium, lacus maximus placerat tincidunt, augue quam scelerisque est, a facilisis sapien libero eu enim. Etiam pretium, metus eu ultricies tempus, mauris nunc sollicitudin lacus, in viverra massa sem in odio. Maecenas sed urna sit amet ipsum tempus molestie. Sed in justo ac velit dictum pulvinar. Mauris dictum lectus ipsum, id sodales massa facilisis sed. Fusce vestibulum nibh urna, eget pretium odio egestas quis.
Integer nec enim vel turpis efficitur volutpat. Fusce iaculis, libero vitae tristique egestas, risus tortor vehicula lorem, ut sollicitudin lorem magna iaculis libero. Praesent tincidunt justo id sapien rutrum, et maximus arcu venenatis. Mauris ac lacus magna. Curabitur blandit lectus a ex varius pellentesque. Pellentesque ut risus porta odio tempus condimentum. Phasellus id arcu tortor. Proin ante lorem, rutrum et libero id, venenatis pretium nisl. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Vestibulum rutrum ligula nec bibendum ultrices.
Suspendisse potenti. Phasellus non convallis mi. Vivamus egestas suscipit orci in hendrerit. Curabitur in ullamcorper eros, eu vulputate est. Curabitur sit amet ipsum quis purus malesuada aliquet. Cras et consectetur sem. Donec et nisl justo. Sed ut libero eu lectus eleifend porttitor. Duis pellentesque leo leo, a dapibus orci sollicitudin et. Donec sed quam quis dolor bibendum pellentesque. Nunc fringilla lectus nec pulvinar molestie. Pellentesque leo nibh, interdum quis lacus quis, ultrices pretium augue. Curabitur malesuada scelerisque sem, vel dapibus enim congue vel. Sed sed lacus odio. Fusce imperdiet massa ut tincidunt varius. Nam a nibh sed leo sodales commodo sed rutrum orci.
Integer ullamcorper mauris vitae feugiat viverra. Sed mollis dictum mauris, ut commodo ante placerat eu. Phasellus ut libero vel ante dapibus semper nec id ligula. Vestibulum in vestibulum neque, in aliquet sem. Morbi varius ac dolor vel semper. Duis lacinia urna turpis, in molestie augue varius vel. Nullam eleifend tellus ut elit porttitor, ut elementum eros sollicitudin. Maecenas quis luctus dolor. Maecenas fermentum sed diam non iaculis. Nulla sceleri...
Especially irritating the the last sentence "The result was amazing".
Is there a word for describing this type of writing in English?
As I see you can split the question/answer in two, first the anthropomorphising of the plane and the events that happened. And second, something I see a lot on sites like "Hack a day", seems to me like the need to add more to the story, because the journalist otherwise cannot justify publishing it as a story. As it would only be a summary of the events already documented in the sources.
Bad writing.
But I don't think I'm using the term quite right, this seems to be a more specific issue in fiction.
I remember one famous story of a doctor in a beechcraft who passed out from hypoxia -- only to awaken hours later by the jarring of the airplane bouncing along in a cornfield. The plane's autopilot had kept the wings level until it ran out of gas. Then it slowly descended into a field.
What a story that guy had to tell! I wonder if he flew very much after that.