Dave T-W @davoloid@social.cleverlibre.org

@hosford42 Exactly. I've been that way since I was a teen and read til the early hours. Then kids disrupted *any* chance of a routine.

@hosford42 Was reading an air crash investigation report and one of the things mentioned was Acute and Chronic sleep debt. That's something I'm going to look into. Acute being where you miss a few hours in a 2 week period, Chronic where that has built up over months and even years.

https://www.risescience.com/blog/can-you-catch-up-on-sleep#:~:text=Acute%20sleep%20debt%20is%20short,Daytime%20sleepiness

@hosford42 I have been making a real attempt this week at downing the phone before sleep and reading instead. Still trying to get into that routine but it's definitely a key factor.

@hannah "Yo fam, check out my brand new sundial! Tells the time here, Constantinople and the astrological hours!"

@hannah Was curious. seems there's a religious explanation. Arabic numerals are house of the day, Roman numerals are hours after previous sunset. Used to define when the Ave Maria is rung (half our after sunset).
https://www.reddit.com/r/Astronomy/comments/ey6k5a/hi_guys_im_an_absolute_layman_but_i_cannot_find/

Don't think there's much more to learn from armchair expert observations of the #Haneda collision, but I've always found the reports fascinating.

They show how diligent and thorough the investigations are, as well as everyone and every aspect of the systems involved in #aviation.

The analysis of the aircraft equipment, crew resource management, passenger behaviour, airport layout, inspections and procedures all contribute to understanding where the "Swiss cheese" holes lined up. Anyone interested in #Safety and especially #Space should take a read through such reports.

@oldrawgabbit 25% believe FBI instigated, and how many more think it was a legitimate attempt to restore Trump to his "rightful place"... and would do so again? Republicans keep allowing this lifetime grifter to keep tearing America apart.

@Daojoan NB, I don't just mean the story structure, but also framing of shots, lighting, editing choices, music, scene blocking, production design... Lots of other elements that are standard now but you don't see in mid-century movies that still have strong storylines.

@Daojoan I have thought about this several times. I'd say that most movies still follow conventional timelines and stories, because the stories are interesting enough in themselves.

However, over the century of cinemagoing, audiences have become more literate and used to stories, flashbacks etc. It's possible to add more complexity, weave plots so that there's more of a moment to the "surprise". And make repeated viewings more enjoyable as we see more details.

I bet that half the movies in the top 20 (other than blockbusters) would have been unwatchable in previous decades because audiences hadn't grown up with that grammar of movies. At the same time, many of the classics we still revere now are because they subverted the expectations of the time.

I'd love to know some examples of current movies that you think are overly complicated or incoherent. Oppenheimer is an obvious target, but for me it took me inside his thought process as he recalled his life, jumping back and forth between events.

Agree with Lost, although I understand that the writers got a bit stuck early on after the "mystery of the week" format got tired and they promised something that they couldn't actually deliver.

Now there's an extended clip of the landing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NbVdIoJsHY
Seems more likely the A350 landed almost on top, with some damage on the nose from the Dash-8 propellers and the main explosion from the engines going through the wings. Must have been just to the side else even the pilot wouldn't have survived.

I lack time/skills to crop and annotate this clip which I referred to above. We can see the right wing strobe light from the Dash-8 hit the ground off, then a frame later the A350 landing light drops. About 5 frames later the explosion starts. https://youtu.be/Oy4RIvRcwUo

Again, someone will do a more accurate version of this, but we can see how the right wingtip of the Dash-8 is just at the nose of the A350, whilst A350's engines are larger than the diameter of the Dash8. A complete rear-end would have shown much more damage on the A350.
Likely the A350 nose hit the wing, span the Dash8 to the left and the A350 engine also just caught the wing. There's little other damage on the A350 left wing that would suggest a collision with the rear stabiliser.

Quick comparison of the two aircraft that collided at Haneda. Shows how it was possible for the A350 to have relatively little damage immediately after the collision (collapsed nose, dent on the left wing, no damage down the left side of the fuselage).
In the absence of mm accurate radar and black boxed, analysis of the landing lights just before collision will be key.

@hosford42 This short podcast was useful this morning. Mood already lightened by considering a couple of these as I walk through the office doors.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/1S7m2oxhnWfH2JFqzkFFvq?si=6-_2l8FRTjCO_6I78C76kA

@Free_Press There were 6 on the CG plane. The captain survived but was said to be in a serious condition about 7 hours ago.

@hosford42 +1
It is really hard to find a way out of times like these.