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

71–80 of 338 posts

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

#71

Post by rob74 »

sva_ wrote: post #61

> "So I started bracing for what was happening, and very suddenly there was a very dramatic drop so everyone seated and not wearing seatbelt was launched immediately into the ceiling," 28-year-old student Dzafran Azmir said. > "Some people hit their heads on the baggage cabins overhead and dented it, they hit the places where lights and masks are and broke straight through it." That's why I try to keep my seatbelt on…

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.

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

#73

Post by unsupp0rted »

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…

I wonder whether on average it's less risky on transatlantic flights to spend as much time out of your seat going to the bathroom, standing around, and stretching as possible vs. as much time buckled in as possible.

My guess is lethal turbulence is so rare, and things like deep-vein thrombosis are so common compare to that rarity, that it's not even close.

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

#74

Post by portaouflop »

rob74 wrote: post #71
sva_ wrote: post #61

> "So I started bracing for what was happening, and very suddenly there was a very dramatic drop so everyone seated and not wearing seatbelt was launched immediately into the ceiling," 28-year-old student Dzafran Azmir said. > "Some people hit their heads on the baggage cabins overhead and dented it, they hit the places where lights and masks are and broke straight through it." That's why I try to keep my seatbelt on…

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.

Don’t tell me what to do!

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

#75

Post by riehwvfbk »

PaulRobinson wrote: post #30
marcinzm wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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 all day? (never know when a ceiling tile could fall down)

Would your opinion change following this hypothetical media blitz? Would you hop on the bandwagon and decry the irresponsibility of the anti-helmet folks?

If you think about this for a second before hitting that downwards pointing triangle, does this dumb example mean that it's actually more about what's socially acceptable than actual safety? Why would you feel dumb wearing a helmet all day now, and dumb for not wearing it in that world?

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

#76

Post by dailykoder »

rob74 wrote: post #71
sva_ wrote: post #61

> "So I started bracing for what was happening, and very suddenly there was a very dramatic drop so everyone seated and not wearing seatbelt was launched immediately into the ceiling," 28-year-old student Dzafran Azmir said. > "Some people hit their heads on the baggage cabins overhead and dented it, they hit the places where lights and masks are and broke straight through it." That's why I try to keep my seatbelt on…

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.

What's not to understand about this? Airplanes are just super f'in safe and most people just think that nothing will ever happen to them, because rarely anything happens. Things do happen, but walking around the plane is cooler

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

#77

Post by MrMan »

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…

[dead]

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

#78

Post by MrMan »

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.

[dead]

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

#79

Post by portaouflop »

jna_sh wrote: post #58
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…

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

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

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

#80

Post by portaouflop »

onlyonhn2 wrote: post #18
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…

Agree. Has anyone died at Emirates A380 bar or Qatar minibar? Nope. I'll take my chances just as I do in thousands of scenarios a day that I just dont care to register.. This seems like a guy that when pair programming on someone else's keyboard uses gloves - we've all met them...

Other people’s keyboards are most of the time borderline disgusting so I can sympathise with _that guy_ to some extent
Post reply on HN