undefined | Better HN

0 pointsM_Grey9y ago0 comments

In the 1-2 minutes between this thing booming past them, and being sent into a spin... you want them telling people to buckle up? That doesn't seem like the easier solution; it mostly sounds like a way to have people still hurrying in the aisles when it's too late.

0 comments

wfunction9y ago

Even half a minute minute is a hell of a lot of time and overwhelmingly better than no notice. Currently airplanes sometimes only turn on the sign after the turbulence has already started.

Also, it's not like they never have no idea which airplanes are around them until they visually see the airplane. They could turn on the sign earlier if they know earlier.

M_GreyOP9y ago

I mean you say that, but wasn't this an accident predicated on not being aware of the positions of other planes? You're basically saying that we should plan for accidents, because wearing a seatbelt is somehow... what? Cumbersome?

If your neurological integrity isn't worth some hours in a seat, I guess that's your choice to make though.

wfunction9y ago

> I mean you say that, but wasn't this an accident predicated on not being aware of the positions of other planes?

Uh, no? "an Airbus A380-800 was observed by the crew passing 1000 feet above" http://avherald.com/h?article=4a5e80f3

> You're basically saying that we should plan for accidents

Yes, whenever possible. It should make sense, really.

> because

...because it's sometimes possible and predictable, in which case it logically makes sense to plan for it.

> wearing a seatbelt is somehow... what? Cumbersome?

Not because of that. But yes, it is cumbersome. Makes it harder to relax, sleep, get up, etc... is this really that shocking to you?

1 more reply

lathiat9y ago

In my experience (particularly on Emirates) they generally turn the seatbelt sign on before the turbulence because they can generally predict it on radar.

It is a little annoying when you have 20-30 minute seatbelt periods with barely any actual turbulence but there you go.

M_GreyOP9y ago

This is true for any airline, but there is something (like the story in this case) called "CAT" or Clear Air Turbulence.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

wfunction9y ago

Even half a minute minute is a hell of a lot of time and overwhelmingly better than no notice. Currently airplanes sometimes only turn on the sign after the turbulence has already started.

Also, it's not like they never have no idea which airplanes are around them until they visually see the airplane. They could turn on the sign earlier if they know earlier.

M_GreyOP9y ago

If your neurological integrity isn't worth some hours in a seat, I guess that's your choice to make though.

wfunction9y ago

> I mean you say that, but wasn't this an accident predicated on not being aware of the positions of other planes?

Uh, no? "an Airbus A380-800 was observed by the crew passing 1000 feet above" http://avherald.com/h?article=4a5e80f3

> You're basically saying that we should plan for accidents

Yes, whenever possible. It should make sense, really.

> because

...because it's sometimes possible and predictable, in which case it logically makes sense to plan for it.

> wearing a seatbelt is somehow... what? Cumbersome?

Not because of that. But yes, it is cumbersome. Makes it harder to relax, sleep, get up, etc... is this really that shocking to you?

1 more reply

lathiat9y ago

In my experience (particularly on Emirates) they generally turn the seatbelt sign on before the turbulence because they can generally predict it on radar.

It is a little annoying when you have 20-30 minute seatbelt periods with barely any actual turbulence but there you go.

M_GreyOP9y ago

This is true for any airline, but there is something (like the story in this case) called "CAT" or Clear Air Turbulence.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse