Heartland

Ah, you have try to look at it positively, the more recent the last one was, the less chance you have to be in a major one.

Brrrr, statistics....

Another crash?!

robertzombie wrote:

Debaser wrote:Also finding out recently why they advise brace position was not my favourite insight either....

Dare I ask why?

Wiki says in the "Myths" section something about dental records.. can't see anything else creepy in the article, unless I'm just too tired.

I've always figured it was down to which bones you would prefer to have broken - arms/collar-bones/shoulders versus neck/back/cranium.

I felt kinda sickish by just reading the article...brrr...

I'm never quite bothered by the security stuff they announce when boarding flights, when you're going down, you're going down, no?

Obviousman wrote:I'm never quite bothered by the security stuff they announce when boarding flights, when you're going down, you're going down, no?

True.
I remember that on one of my last flght boarded a girl who had her own "ritual". Before the take off she signed herself with the sign of the cross and then got into the "brace" position for basically the whole of the flight. When the plane landed, she went back to a normal sitting position, signed herself again and prepared to get off the plane.
I was like :wtf?

...First Spanair flight back into LBA last night. Fleet must have been grounded.

Norman Hunter wrote:...First Spanair flight back into LBA last night. Fleet must have been grounded.

Not really, other Spanair flights have gone out this week (one of which had to do an emergency landing - which was in the news here)

Obviousman wrote:Ah, you have try to look at it positively, the more recent the last one was, the less chance you have to be in a major one.

Brrrr, statistics....

That's not the case unfortunately.

Well, to be sure, people will probably be more on their toes checking and double-checking planes for a while, but statistically speaking, one plane crashing doesn't lower the likelihood of any other plane crashing.

Another!

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/bre ... aking3.htm

Not a crash this time, thankfully, but the folks on board must have gotten quite a fright all the same.

mh wrote:Another!

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/bre ... aking3.htm

Not a crash this time, thankfully, but the folks on board must have gotten quite a fright all the same.

Army plane crashed into the ocean earlier today. Phillipines....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080826/wl_ ... plane_dc_3

There was a little fire on the gear of an ATR 42 at Munich Airport as well. It seems aviation incidents make a lot of money for Reuters and their likes at the moment. These things happen every now and then, but normally don't make it to the news.
Nobody reported about the ATR that flew into a hard hailstorm and got severly damaged on the wing's leading edge and nose by big hailballs. A mechanic I know told me the chord of the wing was reduced by some 5 inches! The pilot touched the plane down at unhealthy speed for fear of a stall, thus ruining the brakes, but I suppose the plane was a write off after the damage it received anyway. No passengers injured or killed, only a couple of pants stained.
That did not appear in the news anywhere.
Death sells, huh?

markfiend wrote:

Obviousman wrote:Ah, you have try to look at it positively, the more recent the last one was, the less chance you have to be in a major one.

Brrrr, statistics....

That's not the case unfortunately.

Well, to be sure, people will probably be more on their toes checking and double-checking planes for a while, but statistically speaking, one plane crashing doesn't lower the likelihood of any other plane crashing.

Depends on how you interpret them, no? I know it doesn't really make the chance go down, but in the same period there's only so many deadly crashes statistically speaking I suppose...

But statistics always make me think about how 95% of the car accidents are caused by people who weren't drunk

OK, take an example. A fair coin should land on heads and tails an equal number of times. If a fair coin lands on heads 10 times in a row, it makes no difference to the probability of the eleventh toss being heads.

HHHHHHHHHHT is no more likely than HHHHHHHHHHH

markfiend wrote:OK, take an example. A fair coin should land on heads and tails an equal number of times. If a fair coin lands on heads 10 times in a row, it makes no difference to the probability of the eleventh toss being heads.

HHHHHHHHHHT is no more likely than HHHHHHHHHHH

That's kind of what I meant with "it doesn't really make the chance go down" What I meant is it's not the previous behaviour that dictates the behaviour of the coin on throw eleven, rather the general chance of head or toes (i.e. the weight of the coin on either side). Nevertheless when you have a perfectly weighed coin, it would go 50/50 H/T after a number of tosses.

But perfect circumstances don't exist, do they...

(my explications probably being far from perfect too seeing I have quite a dislike of statistics and it's been a long time since I did any)

mh wrote:I've always figured it was down to which bones you would prefer to have broken - arms/collar-bones/shoulders versus neck/back/cranium.

The bit that chills me is that even for an incident over land the passengers are instructed to put on the lifejackets. Apparently this makes finding the remains easier when they're spread out over a wide area...

Still safer than driving (and I do love flying, so a few scares over the course of a week or so ain't likely to give me the heebeejeebies about it.)

Hijack in Sudan and (probably) an attempted hijack in Rotterdam where a plane was kept on ground for 6 hours and two or three people arrested. Flew with that airliner (Transavia) last month...

EvilBastard wrote:

mh wrote:I've always figured it was down to which bones you would prefer to have broken - arms/collar-bones/shoulders versus neck/back/cranium.

The bit that chills me is that even for an incident over land the passengers are instructed to put on the lifejackets. Apparently this makes finding the remains easier when they're spread out over a wide area...

Alledgedly some stewardess actually said this during the safety instructions:
"On our way from Los Angeles to New York we will cross 24 lakes, 75 rivers and a greater number of swimming pools That's why we introduce you to the handling of the lifejacket:"

eotunun wrote:

EvilBastard wrote:

mh wrote:I've always figured it was down to which bones you would prefer to have broken - arms/collar-bones/shoulders versus neck/back/cranium.

The bit that chills me is that even for an incident over land the passengers are instructed to put on the lifejackets. Apparently this makes finding the remains easier when they're spread out over a wide area...

Alledgedly some stewardess actually said this during the safety instructions:
"On our way from Los Angeles to New York we will cross 24 lakes, 75 rivers and a greater number of swimming pools That's why we introduce you to the handling of the lifejacket:"

Well...she woud not tell the real reason if EB's one is....