Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mschuster91 838 days ago
One thing I won't ever understand is why we allow large airports to be located in a way that puts any kind of infrastructure, be it residential, commercial, transportation or recreational, under the flight path for critical phases (i.e. start/land). Right where I used to work there's a memorial placard for a plane that crashed in 1960 due to an engine failure [1], and maybe five minutes worth of walking from where I grew up is another memorial for a plane that failed to start, crashed into a house and led to the deaths of, among others, a significant number of players of the ManU squad [2].

There have been so many incidents and near-incidents that it should be a no-brainer, but eh, guess it's more important to have airports closer to (or even worse, inside) cities. Yes, yes, I know, airplane travel is one of the safest modes of transportation there is, but still, a dominant majority of accidents in commercial aviation happens during landing and takeoff [3]. GA is a bit different because it seems that a lot of GA pilots fuck up maneuvering [4], but still, takeoff and landing account for about half the incidents.

[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flugzeugungl%C3%BCck_am_17._De...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_air_disaster

[3] https://www.statista.com/chart/31529/most-airplane-accidents...

[4] https://www.redbirdflight.com/landing/general-aviation-accid...

6 comments

You’re confused about why transit hubs, whose purpose is to move people, are built where the people are?
They did generally put airports out in the middle of the sticks . . . and then stuff grew up around them.
If I live within two miles of an airport, directly on the flight path, what are the odds of my house being damaged by a plane versus burning down by other causes, damaged by a falling tree, struck by lightning, etc. I don’t know, but am certain it’s negligible comparatively.
People generally want to travel from areas with lots of people, to other areas with lots of people. So cities.

There has actually been a proposal to move Schiphol (Amsterdam Airport) to an artificial island in the North Sea, because Schiphol is producing a lot of noise pollution for the surrounding towns. (And not just that; my sister used to play hockey on fields under an approach, and sometimes the field would smell like kerosine.)

But such a move would dramatically increase travel time to and from the city. Although maybe you could save time by having a dedicated train line and do checkin before getting in the train, passport check while on the train, etc.

There is more risk allowing homes to be built on streets where cars go.
Taking off from O’Hare airport in Chicago typically requires ascending over miles of residential neighborhoods