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

221–230 of 338 posts

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

#221

Post by banish-m4 »

filleduchaos wrote: post #217
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.

Well, duh. I just thought the interior fittings were more robust. I guess even they got the modern plastic "Lexus" treatment.

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

#222

Post by mejutoco »

pooper wrote: post #42
onlyonhn2 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Case in point, make self driving cars cheap enough (under USD 20k new for a decent electric car with self driving) and I'll gladly support a complete ban on humans driving on public roads if that means the self driving cars can coordinate and drive better.

First we would need self driving cars to exist I am afraid.

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

#223

Post by pfdietz »

ec109685 wrote: post #186
maxglute wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think more people would belt up if they have animations of people cracking necks or getting sucked out of window in the preflight video.

Probably would result in less people flying, more people driving, resulting in more deaths overall.

So, combine it with pictures of what happens when you don't wear a seatbelt in a car.

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

#225

Post by darkwater »

ajross wrote: post #191
darkwater wrote: post #94

Horrible news. Speaking of the physics involved, I was thinking: if it's just free fall, caused by gravity and no air sustaining the wings, this should not happen, right? Some random Quora answer says that it's because during turbulence there is actually air pressing wings down and accelerating them down faster than gravity, and that's why you hit the ceiling. Intuitively that makes sense but, can anyone confirm? Edi…

Free-fall, or really slightly negative G's, will lift you up out of your seat more or less gently. It won't hurt you. But when the aircraft regains lift, which can happen rapidly in turbulent conditions, you will accelerate downward relative to the cabin. And the plane is design-tested to something like 5G. It can hurt you very badly.

But then you should hurt your butt, not your head as described in the article, no? I still think that if you get your head against the oxygen masks it's because the plane accelerated a lot downwards.

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

#226

Post by andybak »

spacedcowboy wrote: post #206
andybak wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [..] in response to your use of ignorance as a defense for ignoring airplane crew instructions. Unless I come from an alternate universe - most people wear their seatbelt during take-off and landing and when the seatbelt light comes on. I wear mine through most of the flight but I only started doing this fairly recently because I learned more about turbulence. I'm not defending ignorance at all. I'm simply describi…

I think maybe you come from an alternate universe. It’s been standard procedure for at least 3 decades to wear your seatbelt, even if loosely, all the time you’re on a plane, apart from when going to the loo or otherwise moving around. I mean, I don’t really know how to say it without sounding like a git. This is simply what you do. What “everyone” does, for a loose definition of everyone. The “everyone” that wears s…

As mentioned elsewhere I have generally worn a seatbelt on planes for several years. And I think other people should.

And I religiously wear one in a car - just like any sane person.

I'm really sorry not to be the strawman that people in this thread seem to be craving.

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

#227

Post by neilo40 »

donatj wrote: post #85

I was once on a flight where my seatbelt refused to fasten and I said nothing because I didn't want to be moved away from my wife. Let me tell you, after reading this, that will never happen again.

I think they would have just brought you another. They unclip from the seat very easily (in a safe way of course)

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

#228

Post by cangeroo »

hbarka wrote: post #190

“A September 2022 study predicts that clear-air turbulence will increase significantly around the globe by the period 2050-2080, in particular along the busiest flight routes, and the strongest type of turbulence will increase the most.” https://edition.cnn.com/2024/05/21/world/singapore-airlines-...

Why didn't they reference the study by title and author names? Who conducted the study? How can we fact check it?

This is bad journalism.

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

#229

Post by lurking_swe »

andybak wrote: post #82
rob74 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup... I still don't understand why people decide to not put on their seatbelt while being seated. It's not like you have a lot more freedom of movement without the seatbelt? And it might just save your life in events like this one.

I've never seen turbulence like this. And until fairly recently I didn't know it was really possible. So it's a bit like "why don't people wear a welding mask while cooking?" It was never even a risk that I had considered before.

Pro tip: air travel “rules” are written in blood. There’s (usually) a reason rules exist.

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

#230

Post by lurking15 »

jna_sh wrote: post #219
lurking15 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

nah it's this covid authoritarianism that blows risks out of proportion and usually with scant evidence and does it in a categorical way that ignores impacts which often have WORSE harms than the thing they're trying to protect against

in the flight case, it could very well be that if you were able to count, there's more harm from DVT from sitting in a seat all flight, versus getting up to walk around regularly and potentially being hurt by turbulence

just a cursory search shows ~300 serious injuries in 30 years tracked by the FAA

Post reply on HN