Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

One dead as London-Singapore flight hit by turbulence

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 338 posts

Re: One dead as London-Singapore flight hit by turbulence

#21

Post by H8crilA »

jmyeet wrote: post #4

There are no details here. Thw two obvious questions that will be investigated are: 1. Was there any warning for the turbulence? A lot can be picked up by radar but not all and it depends on what equipment the airplane has although Singapore Airlines isn't known for skimping on equipment like that. 2. Was the seat belt sign on? Was the passenger wearing their seat belt? Basically, was the airline at fault? Was the cr…

I don't know this case, but there were many cases before that:

1. No, in most cases it is CAT (clear air turbulence). CB turbulence is easily detected by radar and avoided; CAT doesn't show on radar as there are no clouds involved.

2. No, since it comes without a warning. I mean there are forecasts of CAT, and you also hear what other aircraft report (the ATC takes that into account too), but every now and then someone has to be the first to enter some more shaky air.

Also, in most cases this is at best moderate turbulence (meaning it doesn't really affect the handling of the plane), but that is enough to temporarily get from 1g to 0g or below, and make some passenger fly up in the cabin, then fall down.

Re: One dead as London-Singapore flight hit by turbulence

#22

Post by corobo »

marcinzm wrote: post #17
PaulRobinson wrote: post #8

Tragic, horrid and going to make a lot of nervous flyers more nervous. I've been through some pretty heavy turbulence in my time, but thankfully nothing this severe. I've been through enough though to know that a lot of people don't take it very seriously. I've been on flights with screaming passengers, and _very_ quiet British Marines, both in reaction to some pretty nasty air, and I'm always surprised that turbulen…

When I walk in a city I don't spend my time constantly scanning the sky and every building around me for a potential falling object. Or research the structural history of every bridge I drive over then spend hours avoiding certain ones. Or a hundred other rare things that do kill people but statistically not often. Everyone dies one day and everyone has a single life. I don't see the point of spending that one life i…

A bird shat on my head like 10 years ago and I look up at everything now. Street lights, overhangs, anything a bastard pigeon could be sitting on.

I don't fear death, for I will be dead. I fear unexpected inconvenience

Re: One dead as London-Singapore flight hit by turbulence

#23

Post by PaulRobinson »

marcinzm wrote: post #17
PaulRobinson wrote: post #8

Tragic, horrid and going to make a lot of nervous flyers more nervous. I've been through some pretty heavy turbulence in my time, but thankfully nothing this severe. I've been through enough though to know that a lot of people don't take it very seriously. I've been on flights with screaming passengers, and _very_ quiet British Marines, both in reaction to some pretty nasty air, and I'm always surprised that turbulen…

When I walk in a city I don't spend my time constantly scanning the sky and every building around me for a potential falling object. Or research the structural history of every bridge I drive over then spend hours avoiding certain ones. Or a hundred other rare things that do kill people but statistically not often. Everyone dies one day and everyone has a single life. I don't see the point of spending that one life i…

Do you look both ways when crossing the road?

There are reasonable measures those around you can take to ensure that falling objects don't crash into you from the sky, or that the bridge you're on does not collapse as you're driving over it. The risk is mitigated by reducing likelihood and impact.

There is nothing a pilot can do to avoid an air pocket. There is little mitigation possible.

Re: One dead as London-Singapore flight hit by turbulence

#24

Post by marcinzm »

PaulRobinson wrote: post #23
marcinzm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I walk in a city I don't spend my time constantly scanning the sky and every building around me for a potential falling object. Or research the structural history of every bridge I drive over then spend hours avoiding certain ones. Or a hundred other rare things that do kill people but statistically not often. Everyone dies one day and everyone has a single life. I don't see the point of spending that one life i…

Do you look both ways when crossing the road? There are reasonable measures those around you can take to ensure that falling objects don't crash into you from the sky, or that the bridge you're on does not collapse as you're driving over it. The risk is mitigated by reducing likelihood and impact. There is nothing a pilot can do to avoid an air pocket. There is little mitigation possible.

But then it's not about safety. It's about your need to feel in control of the situation even if the control is an illusion. That is fair in a way but saying it's a safety thing or that people are crazy for not needing to feel in control all the time isn't fair. Or even calling them crazy for not doing the same ultimately meaningless actions as you to create an illusion of control for themselves

Re: One dead as London-Singapore flight hit by turbulence

#25

Post by onlyonhn2 »

ghaff wrote: post #20
coldtea wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a reason why you're advised to keep your seatbelt fastened when seated. I simply don't understand some cabins that have cocktail bars in them - are you absolutely crazy? No, just not pusillanimous about it, given the odds.

There are a bunch of things airlines could do. Eliminate drink & food/snack service. Strap in 3 point harness for the whole trip and pee in a bottle if you must. I suspect those would be… unpopular. At least some airlines banned hardcover books during takeoff and landing for a time.

Careful with the non-declared /s. Some of these people would actually push for these reforms given a little encouragement.

Re: One dead as London-Singapore flight hit by turbulence

#26

Post by voisin »

I haven’t experienced much turbulence in maybe 15 years, whereas I remember in the 90s I experienced tons of turbulence in almost every flight. I am not sure if this is something modern airliners have been designed to deal with or avoid, or not.

Has anyone else experienced this or is my memory just faulty?

Re: One dead as London-Singapore flight hit by turbulence

#27

Post by PaulRobinson »

onlyonhn2 wrote: post #16
PaulRobinson wrote: post #8

Tragic, horrid and going to make a lot of nervous flyers more nervous. I've been through some pretty heavy turbulence in my time, but thankfully nothing this severe. I've been through enough though to know that a lot of people don't take it very seriously. I've been on flights with screaming passengers, and _very_ quiet British Marines, both in reaction to some pretty nasty air, and I'm always surprised that turbulen…

How do you even cross a road with that approach to risk?

By looking both ways and therefore mitigating the risk through reducing the likelihood of being killed while crossing the road by oncoming traffic.

The risk mitigation technique for dealing with severe turbulence which frequently injures people, and only rarely kills people (thankfully), is to keep your seatbelt loosely fastened, and get out of your seat only when you need to.

The fact this is considered absurd by some replies here is a fascinating insight, TBH.

Re: One dead as London-Singapore flight hit by turbulence

#29

Post by dkdbejwi383 »

corobo wrote: post #22
marcinzm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I walk in a city I don't spend my time constantly scanning the sky and every building around me for a potential falling object. Or research the structural history of every bridge I drive over then spend hours avoiding certain ones. Or a hundred other rare things that do kill people but statistically not often. Everyone dies one day and everyone has a single life. I don't see the point of spending that one life i…

A bird shat on my head like 10 years ago and I look up at everything now. Street lights, overhangs, anything a bastard pigeon could be sitting on. I don't fear death, for I will be dead. I fear unexpected inconvenience

If anything, getting shat on would make me avoid looking up for some time

Re: One dead as London-Singapore flight hit by turbulence

#30

Post by PaulRobinson »

marcinzm wrote: post #24
PaulRobinson wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you look both ways when crossing the road? There are reasonable measures those around you can take to ensure that falling objects don't crash into you from the sky, or that the bridge you're on does not collapse as you're driving over it. The risk is mitigated by reducing likelihood and impact. There is nothing a pilot can do to avoid an air pocket. There is little mitigation possible.

But then it's not about safety. It's about your need to feel in control of the situation even if the control is an illusion. That is fair in a way but saying it's a safety thing or that people are crazy for not needing to feel in control all the time isn't fair. Or even calling them crazy for not doing the same ultimately meaningless actions as you to create an illusion of control for themselves

No, I'm talking about risk mitigation, not control.
Post reply on HN