EPTWhat is going on in South Korea? - Page 4
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
| ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6233 Posts
On January 03 2025 22:51 Magic Powers wrote: It's funny that you accuse me of being the one to divert criticism when I'm going entirely by an expert opinion. Are you a pilot? Are you arguing that his assessment is wrong? Pilots will make errors, this is expected. No human is perfect. In some instances the pilot is mostly to blame for a crash, but in most instances it's a combination of events and the pilot is only one variable. To put blame squarely on the pilot in this instance and not on the wall is absurd. I'm not accusing you of diverting criticism. I'm accusing you of making overconfident conjectures when we have none of the information you would need to support that conjecture. For the third time in the last two days, nobody is saying the bunker shouldn't be moved. However, the bunker is only a relatively small part of the problem. The goal of any review is to recommend ways to avoid the incident in future, and at this specific airport, yes, one recommendation will almost certainly be to re-house the ILS in something frangible. However, at a huge number of other airports without such bunkers, a plane overshooting the runway with no gear at 120 kts would still be a catastrophe. Therefore, it is short-sighted to focus on the bunker and ignore the situation that lead to a plane overshooting the runway at 120 kts in the first place. Your second video is better, but I wonder whether you've actually watched it past the part where he states that the bunker is an issue, because he makes most of the important points. The summary is: - bird strikes are relatively common and planes are designed to withstand them - the hydraulic systems that deploy the gear and flaps are highly redundant and very difficult to disable via strike - the engines themselves are also fully redundant - in the event of total failure, there are tertiary mechanisms to deploy the landing gear For this specific sequence: - engine 2 is seen to take damage on approach - engine 2 appears to be producing thrust on landing, despite this damage - engine 2 has the reversers deployed on landing, which require hydraulics - therefore, the plane has at least partial thrust and hydraulics from one engine on landing Therefore, it is very difficult to explain how damage alone lead to the plane landing without flaps or gear, and if the mechanical situation is ambiguous, it is pure conjecture to state that it was a "reasonably executed landing". While he couches it in apologetic language, this is essentially the conclusion your youtuber reaches as well, and he suggests outright that they simply forgot the gear. There are a multitude of factors that are at least potentially due to pilot error, all of which he raises. There is the apparent failure to deploy the flaps/gear, the nonstandard decision to go around with damage when already configured for landing, the possibility that the wrong engine was shut down, the overspeed coming in, and the fact that the plane unquestionably floats in ground effect for too long and wastes much of the runway. Avoiding any of these would likely have averted the catastrophe, so if even one turns out to be due to pilot error, then pilot error was a significant factor in the crash. We will know in a few months. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On January 04 2025 08:12 Belisarius wrote: I'm not accusing you of diverting criticism. I'm accusing you of making overconfident conjectures when we have none of the information you would need to support that conjecture. For the third time in the last two days, nobody is saying the bunker shouldn't be moved. However, the bunker is only a relatively small part of the problem. The goal of any review is to recommend ways to avoid the incident in future, and at this specific airport, yes, one recommendation will almost certainly be to re-house the ILS in something frangible. However, at a huge number of other airports without such bunkers, a plane overshooting the runway with no gear at 120 kts would still be a catastrophe. Therefore, it is short-sighted to focus on the bunker and ignore the situation that lead to a plane overshooting the runway at 120 kts in the first place. Your second video is better, but I wonder whether you've actually watched it past the part where he states that the bunker is an issue, because he makes most of the important points. The summary is: - bird strikes are relatively common and planes are designed to withstand them - the hydraulic systems that deploy the gear and flaps are highly redundant and very difficult to disable via strike - the engines themselves are also fully redundant - in the event of total failure, there are tertiary mechanisms to deploy the landing gear For this specific sequence: - engine 2 is seen to take damage on approach - engine 2 appears to be producing thrust on landing, despite this damage - engine 2 has the reversers deployed on landing, which require hydraulics - therefore, the plane has at least partial thrust and hydraulics from one engine on landing Therefore, it is very difficult to explain how damage alone lead to the plane landing without flaps or gear, and if the mechanical situation is ambiguous, it is pure conjecture to state that it was a "reasonably executed landing". While he couches it in apologetic language, this is essentially the conclusion your youtuber reaches as well, and he suggests outright that they simply forgot the gear. There are a multitude of factors that are at least potentially due to pilot error, all of which he raises. There is the apparent failure to deploy the flaps/gear, the nonstandard decision to go around with damage when already configured for landing, the possibility that the wrong engine was shut down, the overspeed coming in, and the fact that the plane unquestionably floats in ground effect for too long and wastes much of the runway. Avoiding any of these would likely have averted the catastrophe, so if even one turns out to be due to pilot error, then pilot error was a significant factor in the crash. We will know in a few months. The people you're accusing of being overconfident are very experienced pilots. Bring your complaints to them. This sentence is completely irrelevant: "However, at a huge number of other airports without such bunkers, a plane overshooting the runway with no gear at 120 kts would still be a catastrophe." It's akin to saying "other airports have the same problem, therefore this is not a problem." No, screw that. This mentality is absolutely horrible. Just because something exists in other places doesn't mean it's ok in that place. | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6233 Posts
If you are not going to read, there is no point attempting to have a conversation. I will be ignoring you from this point on, as I gather many others here do. I have learned my lesson. | ||
|
XenOsky
Chile2355 Posts
On December 04 2024 00:20 Ardias wrote: Opposition majority in parliament was preparing impeachment and, probably, criminal case against acting president. He responded with martial law, banning the activity of the parliament and censoring the media. dafuq censor the media and banning the parlament... covid made liberal states way more willing to apply martial law and shit like that, shame. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On January 04 2025 10:28 Belisarius wrote: For the fourth time in the last two days, nobody is saying that the bunker should not be moved. If you are not going to read, there is no point attempting to have a conversation. I will be ignoring you from this point on, as I gather many others here do. I have learned my lesson. Ignore me then. I think you completely missed the original point I made and then complained that I missed yours. In case you have any interest whatsoever to understand where you went wrong, here are a few quote mines: "I really think the bunker is a red herring." "The bunker is not the problem." "I'm not convinced that's any better." All of these statements are strictly false. | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6233 Posts
On January 01 2025 20:35 Belisarius wrote: I really think the bunker is a red herring. No airport in the world is designed for a plane to skid off the end of a runway on its nacelles at 200 kph. The number of things that had to go wrong for that situation to occur is astronomical. Sure, the bunker probably shouldn't have been there and it's an easy recommendation for the report, but there's airports all over the world where the same situation would result in not only the same fireball, but the same fireball in the middle of random residential housing. The bunker is not the problem. On January 03 2025 04:31 Yurie wrote: Nobody is arguing that the wall should be there. If it wasn't there the accident would likely have been less lethal. That still doesn't make it the cause of the crash, only a contributing reason for it being so lethal. On January 04 2025 08:12 Belisarius wrote: For the third time in the last two days, nobody is saying the bunker shouldn't be moved. However, the bunker is only a relatively small part of the problem. On January 04 2025 10:28 Belisarius wrote: For the fourth time in the last two days, nobody is saying that the bunker should not be moved. On January 04 2025 10:28 Belisarius wrote: If you are not going to read, there is no point attempting to have a conversation. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
Do you agree that the three quotes I posted are false? | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11786 Posts
On January 04 2025 10:48 XenOsky wrote: dafuq censor the media and banning the parlament... covid made liberal states way more willing to apply martial law and shit like that, shame. Well, in this case it turned out that the liberal state was very much not willing to apply martial law and so forth. The president tried, and failed completely. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14104 Posts
| ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6233 Posts
| ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
Now, he's turning it into a bunker with Presidential Security Service refusing to comply with the arrest orders and setting up extra barbed wires and barricades all around while his supporters are shuttling in canned food and dry noodles. It's a complete fucking joke, but the world isn't laughing -- our currency and stock market has been taking a beating throughout the whole ordeal, and the whole thing just reflects so badly on our country. On top of this, the whole clown show at the new pres. residence all but guarantees that the next president will be moving right back into the Blue House -- which means more wasted money and more headaches for the people. The only good thing about all of this is that our most die-hard conservatives have been showing their true traitorous colors and sane people in the country are basically completely done with their shit. The People's Power (what an ironic name) party will have to go through some serious restructuring, or if we're lucky, might even end up disbanding entirely, which would make the whole mess worth it in the long run, I suppose. Oh and of course our conservatives are drawing parallels to Trump's bullshit and using that to support their ridiculous claims that this is totally not a big deal and the pres shouldn't have been impeached and definitely shouldn't be arrested and that everything is fine. Fucking MAGA virus needs to die in a fire. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17381 Posts
On January 05 2025 11:39 Salazarz wrote:Fucking MAGA virus needs to die in a fire. I negotiate with confrontational brinksmanship from loud mouthed know-it-all Americans all the time and attitudes like this do not work. This attitude only results in blow back. There is nothing wrong with feeling anger or frustration. You can't let it impact the clarity of your thinking. Relating these issues back to the bunch of American loud mouths is a big intellectual error. If one wishes to lower nationalistic fervour then one must explore its roots and deal with those issues directly. Ignore history and you are doomed to repeat it. So with MAGA specifically we're talking about American middle class workers getting totally fucked over in the 70s by those purporting to support them. And, I guess Vietnam draftees getting fucked over by the USA government along with American hostages languishing in Iran for 444 days. These issues gave rise to the MAGA slogan by Reagan during the 1980 election campaign. Obviously, in South Korea its a totally different story. Ignore history while villianizing and labelling those who disagree with you are you are doomed to repeat your own history. I'd say MAGA's origins in the USA have zero resemblance to the feelings of nationalism in South Korea. So that gives us step #1. Step #1 is: Ignore America. USA ain't got nuttin' to do with nuttin'. Americans make a lot of noise and do a lot of grand standing. Ignore it. This is all standard protocol from the Pierre Elliott Trudeau manual on dealing with nationalism. I'm not inventing the wheel here. Its been dealt with before. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11786 Posts
On January 05 2025 12:36 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I negotiate with confrontational brinksmanship from loud mouthed know-it-all Americans all the time and attitudes like this do not work. This attitude only results in blow back. There is nothing wrong with feeling anger or frustration. You can't let it impact the clarity of your thinking. Relating these issues back to the bunch of American loud mouths is a big intellectual error. If one wishes to lower nationalistic fervour then one must explore its roots and deal with those issues directly. Ignore history and you are doomed to repeat it. So with MAGA specifically we're talking about American middle class workers getting totally fucked over in the 70s by those purporting to support them. And, I guess Vietnam draftees getting fucked over by the USA government along with American hostages languishing in Iran for 444 days. These issues gave rise to the MAGA slogan by Reagan during the 1980 election campaign. Obviously, in South Korea its a totally different story. Ignore history while villianizing and labelling those who disagree with you are you are doomed to repeat your own history. I'd say MAGA's origins in the USA have zero resemblance to the feelings of nationalism in South Korea. So that gives us step #1. Step #1 is: Ignore America. USA ain't got nuttin' to do with nuttin'. Americans make a lot of noise and do a lot of grand standing. Ignore it. This is all standard protocol from the Pierre Elliott Trudeau manual on dealing with nationalism. I'm not inventing the wheel here. Its been dealt with before. Believe me, we would all love to be able to ignore the american hard-right. Sadly, our rightwing people see what happens in the US and see that it works there, so we get the exact same shit with slightly different colors all over the world. The US is once again a beacon of culture, but right now, that culture is incredibly shitty, hateful, full of lies and absurd bullshit and generally disgusting. It is like a lighthouse which instead of shining a light over the sea is now just pissing in all directions. And that MAGA virus does indeed just make politics shit everywhere. Of course, elsewhere it isn't "MAGA", but the same sentiment of just bullshitting your way to a world of alternative facts and somehow winning elections that way is still there. And that way of politics just needs to go. We need to be able to have common facts again, and we need to hold politicians accountable if they just spout bullshit with no base in reality. We need to get back to discussing issues instead of whatever the fuck the US right is doing. Also, it feels like you are kinda missing the point here. No one is talking about 1980s Reagan. We are talking about 2020s Trump. While using the same slogan, it is a very different movement. But i agree that there are underlying core problems that would enable us to no longer have to deal with that shit. People feel shafted, and they notice that they have comparatively less. What they don't notice is where all the stuff is going. Which is billionaires, not foreigners. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
We are right to attack Trump. It's a gigantic mistake to ignore him. All we need to figure out is how to attack him more optimally. | ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2741 Posts
On January 05 2025 12:36 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I negotiate with confrontational brinksmanship from loud mouthed know-it-all Americans all the time and attitudes like this do not work. This attitude only results in blow back. There is nothing wrong with feeling anger or frustration. You can't let it impact the clarity of your thinking. Relating these issues back to the bunch of American loud mouths is a big intellectual error. If one wishes to lower nationalistic fervour then one must explore its roots and deal with those issues directly. Ignore history and you are doomed to repeat it. So with MAGA specifically we're talking about American middle class workers getting totally fucked over in the 70s by those purporting to support them. And, I guess Vietnam draftees getting fucked over by the USA government along with American hostages languishing in Iran for 444 days. These issues gave rise to the MAGA slogan by Reagan during the 1980 election campaign. Obviously, in South Korea its a totally different story. Ignore history while villianizing and labelling those who disagree with you are you are doomed to repeat your own history. I'd say MAGA's origins in the USA have zero resemblance to the feelings of nationalism in South Korea. So that gives us step #1. Step #1 is: Ignore America. USA ain't got nuttin' to do with nuttin'. Americans make a lot of noise and do a lot of grand standing. Ignore it. This is all standard protocol from the Pierre Elliott Trudeau manual on dealing with nationalism. I'm not inventing the wheel here. Its been dealt with before. I agree with some points. I also think there's a need to both consider the actions taken against them and more importantly the consequences. It seems in south korea they wanted to question the president and he ignored it. So now they tried to arrrest him and that failed. It seems many countries you just throw what you can against the nationalist wall and see what sticks. And their response is to ignore it or fight against it. Then the decision is to back down because escalation isn't deemed worth it. Makes the state look weak and like there are no consequences for breaking the law. I think that is wrong. If you decide to arrest someone or stop someone from doing something (breaking in to the capitolium for example) you decide first if it's justified and that the consequences for doing it is worth it. Before you try. And then if you decide to do it then do it. If arresting the previous PM is important then you escalate untill he is arrested. The state has a monopoly of violence after all. If it's just political bullshit don't do it at all. The culture of attacking political opponents in every way possible has to stop, but when there truly is a serious cause the hammer also has to come down. It's like GH points out, if this person actually tried a coup that is serious. At that point you clear the street with riot police, park a tank outside the building and kindly inform his security detail that they can either deal with the riot squad without guns or they can deal with a swat team with their guns after the tank sends 5 rounds of 120 mm HE into the building. If it's not serious maybe don't accuse them of it and just let them keep making a fool of themselves. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6271 Posts
| ||
|
Legan
Finland577 Posts
From the US perspective, allies are sought from the EU or other "Western" countries like South Korea and Japan. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
On January 05 2025 12:36 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I negotiate with confrontational brinksmanship from loud mouthed know-it-all Americans all the time and attitudes like this do not work. This attitude only results in blow back. There is nothing wrong with feeling anger or frustration. You can't let it impact the clarity of your thinking. Relating these issues back to the bunch of American loud mouths is a big intellectual error. If one wishes to lower nationalistic fervour then one must explore its roots and deal with those issues directly. Ignore history and you are doomed to repeat it. So with MAGA specifically we're talking about American middle class workers getting totally fucked over in the 70s by those purporting to support them. And, I guess Vietnam draftees getting fucked over by the USA government along with American hostages languishing in Iran for 444 days. These issues gave rise to the MAGA slogan by Reagan during the 1980 election campaign. Obviously, in South Korea its a totally different story. Ignore history while villianizing and labelling those who disagree with you are you are doomed to repeat your own history. I'd say MAGA's origins in the USA have zero resemblance to the feelings of nationalism in South Korea. So that gives us step #1. Step #1 is: Ignore America. USA ain't got nuttin' to do with nuttin'. Americans make a lot of noise and do a lot of grand standing. Ignore it. This is all standard protocol from the Pierre Elliott Trudeau manual on dealing with nationalism. I'm not inventing the wheel here. Its been dealt with before. I totally agree that ignoring history often leads to history repeating. Which is precisely why all these terminally online MAGA rats in Korea need to shut the fuck up, because we have plenty of history of harebrained despots thinking themselves above the law. The star & stripes waving, MAGA-hat wearing folks in our country have nothing to do with nationalism or worker issues, it's entirely manufactured outrage born chiefly in various far-right American echochambers. These aren't people upset about actual social or economic issues, it's people who are mad about gay liberal communists ruining the country, pining for the glorious days of Miracle on the Han. I also agree that we need to ignore America. You should get that message to the assholes that block our police forces from doing their jobs while citing completely irrelevant American Supreme Court rulings. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
On January 06 2025 01:16 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: I agree with some points. I also think there's a need to both consider the actions taken against them and more importantly the consequences. It seems in south korea they wanted to question the president and he ignored it. So now they tried to arrrest him and that failed. It seems many countries you just throw what you can against the nationalist wall and see what sticks. And their response is to ignore it or fight against it. Then the decision is to back down because escalation isn't deemed worth it. Makes the state look weak and like there are no consequences for breaking the law. I think that is wrong. If you decide to arrest someone or stop someone from doing something (breaking in to the capitolium for example) you decide first if it's justified and that the consequences for doing it is worth it. Before you try. And then if you decide to do it then do it. If arresting the previous PM is important then you escalate untill he is arrested. The state has a monopoly of violence after all. If it's just political bullshit don't do it at all. The culture of attacking political opponents in every way possible has to stop, but when there truly is a serious cause the hammer also has to come down. It's like GH points out, if this person actually tried a coup that is serious. At that point you clear the street with riot police, park a tank outside the building and kindly inform his security detail that they can either deal with the riot squad without guns or they can deal with a swat team with their guns after the tank sends 5 rounds of 120 mm HE into the building. If it's not serious maybe don't accuse them of it and just let them keep making a fool of themselves. This is such a stupid comment. Yeah sure, let's bring out the tanks and start shooting at people because 'the state has a monopoly of violence.' Jesus Christ. Declaring martial law and trying to arrest a bunch of people is serious. But since our military and police chiefs aren't psychotic bloodthirsty maniacs like yourself, the stupid orders were ignored and the president is now rightfully removed. If he and his handpicked guard wants to hole up in a building and hide behind a bunch of dumbass incels chanting 'FREEDUMB!', that's annoying but hardly worth starting a firefight over. | ||
| ||
