64
submitted 3 days ago by Quokka@quokk.au to c/world@quokk.au
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Lysergid@lemmy.ml 68 points 3 days ago

90 km/h, for those who use metric in sane ways

[-] icerunner_origin@startrek.website 32 points 3 days ago

Or around 150,000 furlongs per fortnight

[-] HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 24 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Uh is it not 60? Am I having a stroke?

60 km/h = 60 kilometers in 60 minutes = 1 kilometer in 1 minute

And assuming the fundamentals of mathematics haven't actually changed, that is ungodly slow for pretty much any modern jet aircraft.....

Edit: WHY DOES THE HEADLINE SAY THAT

[-] mumblerfish@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago

That is correct. But the headline also says "more than", making it even more useless.

[-] lividweasel@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago

From the article:

The data, which comes from a system called multilateration, does not show precise altitude and speed information, but it does show the plane fell to earth at a rate of descent of 1,541 metres per minute

92.46 km/h

But still, that’s indeed very slow for an aircraft like that. I’m sure they just worded it that way because it sounds faster.

[-] cynar@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

90kph is very slow for a flight speed, but stupidly fast for a decent speed. That is about half the speed of a skydiver free falling. That, added on to the airspeed, would be a very bad situation for any plane.

[-] CameronDev@programming.dev 13 points 3 days ago

Wtf abc. Australia uses metric, we shouldn't have any issues using metric...

[-] BonsaiBoo@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

What’s that in fast food drive-through lengths?

[-] alapakala@quokk.au 2 points 3 days ago

So basically a suicide crash…

[-] dellish@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Oh I get it: you mean 1.5km per minute. Easy mistake to make.

[-] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 39 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)
  • ✅knots (marine)
  • ✅m/s (SI)
  • ✅km/h (common usage)
  • ✅mi/h (murica)
  • ❌km/s
[-] Goun@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago

Damn, I thought it was one crash per minute in a 1km radius. I'm stupid af.

[-] Patrikvo@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago

Bouncing bomber!

[-] vithigar@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 days ago

Article is written confusingly as the author does not seem to understand that the speed quoted, ~1500m/min, is the descent rate and does not include airspeed.

The plane's actual impact velocity was certainly much higher than that.

[-] slickgoat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

I guess AI has replaced journalists already. That escalated quickly.

[-] BigTuffAl@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 days ago

Look out! We're approaching speeds not seen since the interstate!

[-] ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 days ago

That was just their vertical speed at the time of impact. In normal flight, it's usually zero or close to it. This thing was falling fast, possibly faster than just a freefall.

[-] TheGoldenV@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

I miss the good ol days when we used to use proper Rods and wear an onion on our belt, which was the style at the time.

[-] homes@piefed.world 2 points 3 days ago

At American, I’m getting really tired of rooting for the opposition

[-] alapakala@quokk.au 1 points 3 days ago
this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2026
64 points (100.0% liked)

World News

2207 readers
933 users here now

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great Communities:

Rules

Be excellent to each other

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS