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

211–220 of 338 posts

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

#211

Post by fuzztester »

mrguyorama wrote: post #202
ryandrake wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's only in the last decade that I've noticed the specific language of "keep your seatbelt fastened even if the light turns off". It makes you wonder why they ever even turn off the seatbelt light. Just keep it on the whole time, just like the equally anachronistic no-smoking light. I feel like the light is just there to mollify the older generations who didn't grow up with mandatory seat belts wearing in cars, fo…

>Are there enough of those people still flying that it makes sense to keep that light in use? There are entire states in the US that take that approach. Live free or die and all that. So free.

>There are entire states in the US that take that approach.

Which ones? Rust belt? Flyover zone (or some such term)?

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

#212

Post by pjmlp »

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…

Getting full of coffee due to small air drop, has cured me to never have anything again that isn't inside of a closed bottle.

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

#213

Post by RestlessMind »

banish-m4 wrote: post #201
vsnf wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This behavior is reflected in car attitudes too. Many Japanese drive with a detached seatbelt. Not even the presence of children changes this calculus.

Wat? That seems out of character. Class related?

Actually that seems very Japanese in a weird way - they might be trusting themselves and everyone else to follow rules precisely, thus avoiding all the accidents and obviating the need for seatbelts.

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

#215

Post by fuzztester »

MattPalmer1086 wrote: post #156
portaouflop wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If humans beings were perfectly rational at all times everywhere then the world would look a lot different (and much less exciting I presume)

If human beings were even marginally rational most of the time it would look a lot different!

Solid.

Fear and greed drive markets - Anon.

And humans - Me.

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

#216

Post by fuzztester »

Intermernet wrote: post #109
riehwvfbk wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So let's say the media started a campaign promoting wearing a helmet all the time. The anti-helmet people would be painted as reckless, feckless, and generally deplorable. All the celebrities would endorse wearing a helmet at all times. There would be New York Times editorials about "those people". Questions: Is this still about risk mitigation? If yes, are you at risk now? Why don't you wear your bike helmet at work…

A smart, independently minded person, would do the following risk analysis: - Planes fly through the atmosphere in varying conditions. - The conditions that lead to uncomfortable or dangerous turbulence are not at all uncommon. - These conditions are unpredictable and have little warning. - Wearing a seatbelt is a very minor inconvenience, and will protect me from the worst of the harms that can come from common turb…

>These conditions are unpredictable and have little warning.

Sometimes zero warning, and major harm, as in the current case.

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

#217

Post by filleduchaos »

banish-m4 wrote: post #197

The interior damage appears extreme. Can any mech-aero engs or pilots confirm? EDIT: It's suggested on aviation forums that unbelted passengers hitting the interior broke the plastic retaining clips holding interior panels, leading to dangling debris.

That's a well-known thing. Turbulence injuries come from being launched into the ceiling of the plane due to negative Gs. It's why the seatbelt is important - to restrain you to your seat.

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

#218

Post by pfannkuchen »

RestlessMind wrote: post #213
banish-m4 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wat? That seems out of character. Class related?

Actually that seems very Japanese in a weird way - they might be trusting themselves and everyone else to follow rules precisely, thus avoiding all the accidents and obviating the need for seatbelts.

Is driving actually kind of easy in Japan for this reason? I’ve never had a car while there. It’s wild how different Japan and China are despite being neighbors. I can’t think of a European neighbor pair that is so different.

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

#219

Post by jna_sh »

lurking15 wrote: post #150
jna_sh wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you perceive wearing a seatbelt on a flight and minimising time out of a seat as such a high cost/inconvenience? I hear this line of thought a lot, particularly nowadays around masking to avoid COVID, and I’m always intrigued by this idea that avoiding this tiny act that barely impacts you is somehow sticking a big middle finger up to fear

> particularly nowadays around masking to avoid COVID Ah ok, as I suspected a covid authoritarian that’s deluded and ruthlessly mocking ANY recognition of cost in the cost-benefit analysis of safety measures, meanwhile overestimating the benefit all together.

I don't believe I mocked anyone, maybe I mocked the idea that anyone who wears a seatbelt on a flight is gripped by fear. I apologise to the concept.

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

#220

Post by banish-m4 »

RestlessMind wrote: post #213
banish-m4 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wat? That seems out of character. Class related?

Actually that seems very Japanese in a weird way - they might be trusting themselves and everyone else to follow rules precisely, thus avoiding all the accidents and obviating the need for seatbelts.

Ahh.. a bit too trusting to the point of individual risk in a high trust society.
Post reply on HN