Posts Tagged ‘daycare’

National Transportation Safety Board Holds Tesla Automotive Employee Responsible for Fatal Air Crash in Palo Alto

Monday, November 28th, 2011

(As always, If You Assume That Any Given Plane Crash is Due to Pilot Error, You’ll Probably Be Right.)

Here’s an article about the new NTSB report.

Does it make sense to commute to Los Angeles for work, assuming you had a pilot’s license and an airplane? I don’t know.

Does it make sense to listen to the advice of your air traffic controller concerning the advisability of taking off into heavy fog, even if you don’t have to? Yes it does.

Is there a reason why pilots are told to turn over the Bay after takeoff? Yes there is.

Oh well.

Here’s what people down Palo Alto Way are saying.

And here‘s the “chilling recording” from a SpotShotter tower. (It’s about what you’d expect, with crashing noises and the yelling of the day care center kids who saw the crash.)

The former N5225J, a Cessna 310R with relatively new, perfectly-fine-at-the-time engines: 

(I’ll tell you, I don’t know why our federal government subsidizes Tesla Automotive (and for that matter, General Monkeybusiness in Detroit). Was Tesla paying for the avgas that this Cessna was burning? Does Tesla reimburse CEO Elon Musk for the jet fuel that he burns as he joyrides around the world, as is his wont? I think Tesla used to, but I don’t know about these days. You know, for an electric car company what’s produced not a whole bunch of electric cars, Tesla seems to burn up a lot of petroleum…)

Anyway, here’s the summary – the whole thing you’ll find after the jump.

NTSB Identification: WPR10FA136

14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation

Accident occurred Wednesday, February 17, 2010 in Palo Alto, CA

Probable Cause Approval Date: 11/22/2011

Aircraft: CESSNA 310R, registration: N5225J

Injuries: 3 Fatal.

The pilot departed the airport in near-zero visibility instrument meteorological conditions, and shortly after takeoff, struck a power pole and power lines before impacting terrain. Review of recorded air traffic control tower (ATCT) transmissions revealed that the pilot was initially given his instrument flight rules (IFR) clearance to turn right to a heading of 060 degrees and climb to 3,000 feet. Shortly after verifying his IFR clearance, the pilot received his IFR release from the ATCT controller and was informed that the runway was not visible to the controller. The controller further informed the pilot that takeoff was at his own risk. Shortly after, the controller notified the pilot that he had two minutes for his IFR release, before it expired. The pilot stated that he did not hear a “cleared for takeoff” instruction from the controller. The controller responded that he could not clear the pilot for takeoff, due to not having the runway environment in sight and that “the release is all yours and it’s at your own risk sir.” The pilot acknowledged the transmission and proceeded to take off. One witness, who was adjacent to the accident site, reported that she observed an airplane “suddenly appear from the fog” left of her position. The witness stated that she continued to watch the airplane fly in a level or slightly nose up attitude until it impacted power lines.

Accident site evidence was indicative of a level impact with a power pole about 50 feet above ground level (agl) and at a high airspeed. All major structural components of the airplane were located within the wreckage debris path. Examination of the airframe, engines and propellers disclosed no evidence of any preimpact mechanical anomaly. Weather conditions reported five minutes prior to the accident were wind variable at 5 knots, visibility 1/8th mile, fog, and vertical visibility of 100 feet agl. Weather conditions recorded by the ATCT 11 minutes after the time of the accident were visibility 1/16th mile, fog, and a vertical visibility of 100 feet agl.

Local law enforcement provided recordings from a sound recording system, which captured the accident sequence. The recordings were coupled with airport surveillance radar to interpolate a flightpath for the airplane. The interpolated flightpath indicated an approximate 45-degree left turn shortly after departure to the area of initial impact with the power pole and power lines. A sound spectrum study determined both engines were operating near full power.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

The pilot’s failure follow the standard instrument departure as instructed, and his failure to attain a sufficient altitude to maintain clearance from power lines during takeoff in instrument meteorological conditions.”

(more…)

Safety vs. Self Parody – The 99% Guarding the Kids of the 1% – And, “Won’t Somebody PLEASE Think of the Children!”

Monday, November 28th, 2011

I don’t know, I’m all for safety and whatnot, but something about this Bye-Bye Buggy convoy struck me.

What is it, the orange and yellow safety vests, the orange pennant, the back-up orange pennant, the hand-held stop sign (held by a person with no authority to use a hand-held stop sign on Van Ness), and/or the flashing white LED light on said hand-held stop sign?

Crossing U. S. Route 101, aka Van Ness Avenue:

Click to expand

I don’t know.

Oh wait, that’s right, it’s missing its BABY ON BOARD! sign hanging off the back. I just knew something was wrong with this scene. I’ll obtain one (or a half-dozen) and make a gift to this crew the next time I see them on McAllister or in front of City Hall.

All right, play us out of here, Helen Lovejoy.

Google Employees Will Soon Be Paying $120 per Day for Daycare?!?

Saturday, July 5th, 2008

Check it – if you’re an employee at Google who wants a little employer-provided daycare in the Silicon Valley, you’ll soon be paying $2390 per infant per month according to the leak on Valleywag. So, if you make it to work about 20 days per month, then you’re burning $120 each time you drop off your precious bundle in the morning.

What’s that? You don’t trust the ‘Wag? Well, how about the Grey Lady? Joe Nocera is calling this daycare issue a “rare fumble” for Google on the New York Times today.  

“Sergey Brin said he had no sympathy for the parents, and that he was tired of ‘Googlers’ who felt entitled to perks like ‘bottled water and M&Ms.’”

Did he really say that? The World Wonders. Were the Googlers really crying at work?

But hey, some perqs will remain free of charge at Google. Like the contents of this on-site convenience store, with all the Red Bulls, Rockstars (the drink created by the son of Savage Nation shock-jock Michael Savage!) and, yes, water you can drink. Sadly, Dennis Nedry‘s preferred Jolt Cola is not on the menu, but rest assured, the aforementioned free M&Ms are camera left:

go8f8637-copy.jpg

That Reggio Emilia (named after the place where Ferraris roam free in Northern Italy) approach must cost a fortune. If you want, check out this Ning - see all that stuff? 

Oh well, some feel it’s still a good place to work.

Let’s give three cheers for Valleywag for posting the leaks it gets. Or, put another way:

“Wow! This actually seems like journalism. On Valleywag! And the comments are interesting, too.”

Please Google, next time, less $$$ and “more whimsey.”