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

Latam Airlines SYD to AKL flight: 50 people treated after mid-air incident

rnz.co.nz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 158 posts

Re: Latam Airlines SYD to AKL flight: 50 people treated after mid-air incident

#31

Post by mianos »

progbits wrote: post #20
Tor3 wrote: post #5

What I don't get is why people are not using seatbelts. The only time I'm not using it is when I'm on the way to and from the bathroom. If I'm seated I'm using the seatbelt.

> What I don't get is why people are not using seatbelts. The terrible UX doesn't help. There is a seatbelt icon on the sign, they announce it as "fasten seatbelt sign", which makes it sound like when it is off you don't have to have it fastened. But it really should be "remain seated" sign. Also some people don't wear seatbelts in cars as some idiotic macho thing. I assume there is no helping those.

It's my understanding this was mid flight and not a situation where the seatbelt sign was lit. I believe the original commenter is suggesting that people wear their seatbelt at all times, if possible, seatbelt sign lit, or not. (Which, as once a very frequent flyer, I do, others don't like to if they don't have to).

Re: Latam Airlines SYD to AKL flight: 50 people treated after mid-air incident

#32

Post by rsynnott »

Tor3 wrote: post #5

What I don't get is why people are not using seatbelts. The only time I'm not using it is when I'm on the way to and from the bathroom. If I'm seated I'm using the seatbelt.

They have signs showing when you need to wear seatbelts, so when the seatbelt light goes out, well, what are people _supposed_ to think?

I have noticed that it does seem to have gotten more common to just leave them on for the duration of the flight, in the last couple of decades.

Re: Latam Airlines SYD to AKL flight: 50 people treated after mid-air incident

#33

Post by everfrustrated »

telesilla wrote: post #19
djtango wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for providing your perspective - Why don't we hear about these as often? Is there tech to avoid these air pockets? Was there some kind of negligence involved or should I be more cautious on planes about leaving my loose belongings lying around?

Aside from the fact that this was not turbulence-related: my understanding is that other airlines in the area inform each other about turbulence they experience, as it cannot be detected reliably. A flight from Chile to New Zealand probably has very little air traffic to keep other pilots informed about the state of winds.

While Latam airline, flight was actually Sydney-Auckland

Re: Latam Airlines SYD to AKL flight: 50 people treated after mid-air incident

#34

Post by AlexandrB »

ztetranz wrote: post #22
infecto wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Latam is Chilean. I am not as well traveled in all SA countries but the exposure I have had suggested that seatbelts in cars are fairly optional still, I suspect on a plane you have less incentive.

They're optional for adults in cars here in New Hampshire where the official state motto is "Live free or die".

NH doesn't get enough credit for how weird it is. Between the state motto, the lack of sales or income tax, and stuff like this seatbelt rule it's like we're talking about a totally different country.

Re: Latam Airlines SYD to AKL flight: 50 people treated after mid-air incident

#35

Post by taspeotis »

nomilk wrote: post #14

For anyone else wondering, the plane was a > Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner (Boeing, but not the 737 Max that has been in the headlines the past few years) Source: https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/3/11/50-people-injur...

[flagged]

Re: Latam Airlines SYD to AKL flight: 50 people treated after mid-air incident

#36

Post by stpe »

ztetranz wrote: post #22
infecto wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Latam is Chilean. I am not as well traveled in all SA countries but the exposure I have had suggested that seatbelts in cars are fairly optional still, I suspect on a plane you have less incentive.

They're optional for adults in cars here in New Hampshire where the official state motto is "Live free or die".

Should it not be ”Live free and die” then?

Re: Latam Airlines SYD to AKL flight: 50 people treated after mid-air incident

#37

Post by brabel »

telesilla wrote: post #19
djtango wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for providing your perspective - Why don't we hear about these as often? Is there tech to avoid these air pockets? Was there some kind of negligence involved or should I be more cautious on planes about leaving my loose belongings lying around?

Aside from the fact that this was not turbulence-related: my understanding is that other airlines in the area inform each other about turbulence they experience, as it cannot be detected reliably. A flight from Chile to New Zealand probably has very little air traffic to keep other pilots informed about the state of winds.

The incident happened while still on the Sydney to Auckland leg of the trip, which is not as lonely (but yeah, still not a whole lot of planes going each way).

Re: Latam Airlines SYD to AKL flight: 50 people treated after mid-air incident

#38

Post by [deleted] »

telesilla wrote: post #19
djtango wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for providing your perspective - Why don't we hear about these as often? Is there tech to avoid these air pockets? Was there some kind of negligence involved or should I be more cautious on planes about leaving my loose belongings lying around?

Aside from the fact that this was not turbulence-related: my understanding is that other airlines in the area inform each other about turbulence they experience, as it cannot be detected reliably. A flight from Chile to New Zealand probably has very little air traffic to keep other pilots informed about the state of winds.

[deleted]

Re: Latam Airlines SYD to AKL flight: 50 people treated after mid-air incident

#39

Post by progbits »

mianos wrote: post #31
progbits wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What I don't get is why people are not using seatbelts. The terrible UX doesn't help. There is a seatbelt icon on the sign, they announce it as "fasten seatbelt sign", which makes it sound like when it is off you don't have to have it fastened. But it really should be "remain seated" sign. Also some people don't wear seatbelts in cars as some idiotic macho thing. I assume there is no helping those.

It's my understanding this was mid flight and not a situation where the seatbelt sign was lit. I believe the original commenter is suggesting that people wear their seatbelt at all times, if possible, seatbelt sign lit, or not. (Which, as once a very frequent flyer, I do, others don't like to if they don't have to).

Yes I have it fastened all the time too.

My point was the fact the "fasten seatbelt sign" was not lit in the middle of the flight makes people think it is OK to not have it fastened. Which isn't true.

Re: Latam Airlines SYD to AKL flight: 50 people treated after mid-air incident

#40

Post by ceejayoz »

sp332 wrote: post #4
aurizon wrote: post #2

The plane transited from an air stream (of whatever velocity/vector) into one descending vertically at high speed = instant down elevator = passengers in free fall as plane descends = impact roof hard/soft. Soon exit the stream and get used to it = fall down hard from 7-8 feet in random attitude. Down is the worst, a vertical up = pressed into seat and already standing. Pilot might have had a warning or inkling = fas…

The article says it was a technical problem. The pilot said he lost instrumentation.

A passenger says the pilot says that. I’d wait for further details before firmly concluding that.
Post reply on HN