PDA

View Full Version : Surviving Airplane crashes


Parapunter
3rd Oct 2006, 14:11
Interesting thing on the beeb website, it seems that of 52000 odd pax involved in air crashes between 1983 & 2000 in the USA, only 300 odd were killed.

I've had a bit of a morbid interest in this since my brothers' erstwhile boss was on the Manchester Airtours jet that suffered an exploding combustion can in 1985? IIRC. Anyhoo, there's an episode of Horizon on tonight that is about surviving aircrashes, BBC 2 I think.

Curious Pax
3rd Oct 2006, 15:26
A classmate of my brother lost his parents and sister in that crash too.

I heard the tail end of an interview on the radio this morning on this subject, and it talked about people reverting to instinct in high stress situations. In their research it was surprisingly common for people to struggle to undo their safety belts, as although you would think it simple, people automatically looked for the release button, as found on a car seat belt. This included a dead-heading captain apparently. Fortunately those who were able to comment survived (obviously!).

AcroChik
3rd Oct 2006, 23:12
Practical advice I picked up from... I forget where... has to do with what to wear in an airplane. Nylon, in example, is highly combustible and melts at a low temperature.

Woman's pantyhose is made of extruded nylon fiber, and in the event fast evacuation was required and possible, not having one's lower extremities sheathed in melting nylon could prove to be be an advantage.

Of course, in today's high security environment, women choosing to wear skirts and dresses on airplanes are letting vanity get in the way of reality.

Apparently wool is the least combustible and slowest burning fiber and provides the best insulation against both heat and cold ~ in the case of cold, even when wet.

gorgeous spotter
3rd Oct 2006, 23:18
Watched it but to be honest wished I hadn't as we are flying out on Thursday.... All the crashes it showed have already been covered in more greater detail with better explanations etc on National Geographic Channel on Discovery on SKY, namely Aircrash Investigations and Seconds from Disaster. Can't help it, but watch them whenever they are on.:O

ShyTorque
3rd Oct 2006, 23:19
Best advice is to sit furthest from the scene of the accident.

redsnail
4th Oct 2006, 00:29
Show was full of common sense and practical advice. Listen to the briefing, read your card, note your nearest exit and don't get too pissed/drugged.

It absolutely boils my urine to see smart arsed "frequent flyers" routinely ignoring the brief. Wankerz. I just remind them that I'll be climbing over their dead bodies to get to the exit. That wakes the fukkerz up.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
4th Oct 2006, 00:52
it seems that of 52000 odd pax involved in air crashes between 1983 & 2000 in the USA, only 300 odd were killedI flat out don't believe either of those numbers. I bet there have been individual accidents that have killed more than 300.


Apparently wool is the least combustible and slowest burning fibernot at least or as slow as nomex :8


It absolutely boils my urine to see smart arsed "frequent flyers" routinely ignoring the brief.Good point, but the day they make it relevant is the day I'll listen to it. I think I understand how to fasten the seatbelt by now :rolleyes: I always look for the nearest exit and make a rough count of the seat rows between me and it. The rest is a waste of time.


If you really want to save your life in an airplane crash, take a turkey roasting bag with you :ok:

Tired Old Man
4th Oct 2006, 05:37
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/survivorsguide/

BBC Horizon usually a good hours telly.:)

Curious Pax
4th Oct 2006, 08:18
I think I understand how to fasten the seatbelt by now :rolleyes:
you my wish to re-read this......
I heard the tail end of an interview on the radio this morning on this subject, and it talked about people reverting to instinct in high stress situations. In their research it was surprisingly common for people to struggle to undo their safety belts, as although you would think it simple, people automatically looked for the release button, as found on a car seat belt. This included a dead-heading captain apparently. Fortunately those who were able to comment survived (obviously!).

EGBKFLYER
4th Oct 2006, 08:36
And listening to the brief would help reversion how exactly?

BTW - I don't necessarily listen to everything anymore as I take at least 4 flights a week and could quote the brief verbatim, but I do put my book down so as not to appear completely disinterested.

Curious Pax
4th Oct 2006, 08:52
It would be one more reinforcement of how to undo that particular seatbelt, and so might improve your chances of undoing it in an emergency by 0.1%. In such a situation those sort of odds can be the difference between escape and death.

slim_slag
4th Oct 2006, 09:23
One thought one knew the passenger brief and tended to ignore it then one day a flight attendent came up to me and asked if I was ok, and I said yes. Then she asked me whether I had a lifejacket under my seat.

Of course I hadn't checked and looked a bit of a fool because I was.

So now I check for a lifejacket, and if any smartass FA asks me that one I'll have them, lol :)

OK, to be contraversial, isn't flying is so damned safe nowadays does it really matter? Statistically I am not going to die on a modern jet so why not take a sleeping tablet, it makes me feel better at the other end and I don't get bored? What is the point of making myself feel grotty for a day or so because I cannot take a sleepin tablet to protect myself against a non important risk? I am far more likely to die on the way to the airport, shouldn't I be using my time to protect myself on that part of the journey? The things that are going to kill me on a flight are out of my control, statistically it's going to be somebody elses human error that I can do nothing about. As somebody said earlier count the rows and fight your way out, wasn't that the attitude which saved people at Manchester?

Parapunter
4th Oct 2006, 09:43
I don't know about that. What I do know in the case of my Brother's boss, it came down to saving his wife or his daughter. He chose his daughter & his wife was one of the last to be identified, through dental records. So while it may be stastically insignificant, were it me, I would hold off the sleeping pills I think.

UniFoxOs
4th Oct 2006, 09:53
I flat out don't believe either of those numbers. I bet there have been individual accidents that have killed more than 300.



Me neither - the following from the BBCs website:-

"In the US alone, between 1983 and 2000, there were 568 plane crashes. Out of the collective 53,487 people onboard, 51,207 survived. "

My arithmetic says that's 2280

Cheers
UFO

Krystal n chips
4th Oct 2006, 09:53
[QUOTE=slim_slag;2887890]OK, to be contraversial, isn't flying is so damned safe nowadays does it really matter? Statistically I am not going to die on a modern jet QUOTE]

Statistics can bite----eg the 99 out of a 100 classical convention. A quick example. Started lots of a/c as starter crew in the RAF--always had a fire ext to hand--never got used of course. One happy sunny evening, in a HAS, starting a Jag---jet pipe fire, excess / venting fuel all over the shop and ---whoooosh ! ---one fire----and where was the fire ext ?---the other side of the flames. Fortunately, or sadly, no damage was done to either me, the guy in the cockpit---or the Jag---the only time I never had the fire ext to hand I might add.

verticalhold
4th Oct 2006, 10:34
Always amazes me the number of dipsticks who unbuckle their belts and stand up while we are still taxiing. If I stamp on the brakes they do the domino stunt down the back and some poor sod gets bruised or worse due to stupidity.

It is a criminal offence to wilfully disobey the reasonable instructions of the aircraft commander and those include seat belt signs.

Happily I no longer fly for the airlines and our pax have a greater understanding of what happens around them.

One thing they missed was that the smoke in a burning aircraft is like trying to inhale crumbled oxo cubes. Been there once in an aircraft I was very familliar with, the smoke was shatteringly debilitating, I couldn't even cope with the simple act of opening a door I knew well because of the pain the smoke was causing. My eternal thanks to the RFFS guy outside who did open it and caught me as I fell out.

VFE
4th Oct 2006, 11:35
My thoughts are that not many aeroplanes reverse into hills.

Sit at the back if ya worried about it but if you're the type to worry enough to move seats then chances are you're probably the type to get dicky when it gets lumpy so perhaps sitting over the wings next to all that lovely fuel would be a better option?

Oh decisions decisions..... :\

VFE.

pulse1
4th Oct 2006, 11:55
Watching part of the programme about the importance of seat design made me wonder about a recent flight on BA777.

My wife and I were stting at the very back, starboard side. When my wife sat down in the middle seat, the seat back collapsed backwards on one side. We called for help and the senior steward pushed the back upright and into position. When she sat down again the seat back collapsed again. He then stripped out the cushions and found that a securing nut on one side was missing. He pushed it back into place and said it would be OK now.

As soon as we started to accelerate down the runway, the seat collapsed again. After a reshuffle of passengers, we ended up with three seats between the two of us.

I realise that the back of the rearmost seats is less important in protecting the passenger in that seat, but I can't help feeling that they should have sorted the problem before T/O.

VFE
4th Oct 2006, 12:11
They should do what the RAF did in their VC10's and have rear facing seats. Could be a bit of a barfathon for ya average paying punter tho...

VFE.

Dea Certe
4th Oct 2006, 12:15
The reason flying is so safe today is because we've learned so much from past accidents. Nowadays, we have less toxic, less flammable materials in the cabin so there's a much higher chance of survival. Providing one survives the impact. Cabin crew are better trained as well.

I do worry that, in these days of packing pax in like sardines, it's going to be harder to evacuate in an emergency. Something I've noticed lately is that we seem to have more disabled people flying who will need assistance should it become necessary to leave through the chutes. And we seem to have many more obese pax so I have to wonder if the FAA will have to take that into consideration during certification trials.

And I've often wondered why female cabin crew is required to wear uniforms that are probably not best-suited for emergencies. High heels, nylon hose and a skirt could be a hinderance. As a previous poster mentioned, nylons melt. The polyesters melt. We used to be required to change into our heels before landing. Looks good but doesn't make sense from a safety point.

Dea

BellEndBob
4th Oct 2006, 12:36
I'd be a bit worried if the Cabin Crew were decked out in Fireproof overalls and a helmet.........or would I.......:E

Glad to see that wool is a slower burner when compared against other materials. How did it compare against the others when impacting the ground from 33000 ft? :eek:

There is only so much you can do in an emergency and your fate, in most cases, is in the hands of others. If you started making safety very 'in your face' a lot of the travelling public...would'nt.

As has been said, still far safer than crossing the road.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
4th Oct 2006, 12:53
It would be one more reinforcement of how to undo that particular seatbeltI still don't agree. If you can't figure out how to undo it because of the stress of the crash, then the pointless reminder you had over an hour and a half earlier is going to be equally useless information because of the same stress.

If they REALLY wanted the briefing to be useful, then they would contain useful information and they would update it from time to time instead of endlessly repeating the same 1950s era rubbish about fastening seatbelts. In fact there's the proof. Why do they tell you how to fasten it? How useful is THAT knowledge going to be in a crash.

If safety rather than economics really was a concern, then you wouldn't even be allowed on a flight until you had passed a safety couse in an evacuation simulator.

Dea Certe
4th Oct 2006, 13:36
BellEndBob,

I don't want to go to work in a full fire suit either! Our uniforms are frumpy enough as is. A uniform can be attractive and less flammable but I don't obsess about it. Reasonable care is enough for me.

If I didn't feel mostly safe in my work environment, I wouldn't have stayed.

I worry more about deranged pax physically lashing out and causing harm to other pax or crew. It seems to me we're seeing more of this kind of behavior lately, and I agree with you. It's the in the face security that contributes to increased anxiety levels. The worst incidents I've had were all caused by a triggering of mental health issues. If you've dealt with some of the sillier TSA routines, it's understandable. Not acceptable, but understandable.

Well-trained crew can comply with the safety and security regulations without causing undue distress to our customers.

Dea

AIRWAY
4th Oct 2006, 13:38
Hello,

For anyone interested a national newspaper (UK) printed today within their supplement section a report called "Plane crash at 37,000ft - A Survivor's story.

Parapunter
4th Oct 2006, 14:08
That is unlucky, crashing at 37,000 feet. Shame they didn't pull over & move what ever was in the way.:uhoh:

Dick N. Cider
4th Oct 2006, 15:45
A friend of mine did her PhD thesis on people's reactions to aircraft emergencies following the Midlands fire. British Midlands gave her a B737 to play with in her simulations.

Panic was simulated by offering the proles more money if they got out first. Several injuries in the crush!

The Hustler
4th Oct 2006, 17:44
I'm sure I remember reading that the new A380 takes quite a while to evacuate - and that during the test recently there were a few broken bones . . .

G-CPTN
4th Oct 2006, 19:51
And I've often wondered why female cabin crew is required to wear uniforms that are probably not best-suited for emergencies. High heels, nylon hose and a skirt could be a hinderance. As a previous poster mentioned, nylons melt. The polyesters melt. We used to be required to change into our heels before landing. Looks good but doesn't make sense from a safety point.
Methinks CC should wear DMs and Nora Batty hose.

Boys too . . .

Next 'up' a woollen kilt (short to reduce weight, kilts are heavy).

Boys too.

And a nice tight woollen sweater (you can look GOOD in a sweater, girls)
http://static.flickr.com/52/114581560_c295d14c39.jpg

(Note, this is not a SWEATER, but I suppose it'd do - at a stretch)
http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/4357/boobs2oh.jpg

con-pilot
4th Oct 2006, 20:16
If anybody cares I have survied one aircraft accident and one aircraft incident.

I was the pilot on the incident aircraft, mechanical failure (metal fatigue) of nose gear to extend, not my fault. (My shoes were melted by the foaming agent that was used to foam the runway, nasty stuff.)

I was passenger sitting in the back on the accident aircraft, the aircraft was destroyed by post-impact fire. No injuries to person or clothes.

That's it in 40 plus years of flying, kind of boring actually.

Dea Certe
5th Oct 2006, 02:06
G-CPT!

You are a naughty man! And obviously have a rich, vivid imagination. :E

con-air,

Glad to hear you made it out safely. As I said, my worst experiences have been with deranged pax. Very grateful for that, too.

Dea

G-CPTN
5th Oct 2006, 02:12
I had a female friend who was a hostie in a Britannia aircraft that crashed at Ljubljana in Yugslovia in 1966. She survived, though was seriously burned.

Buster Hyman
5th Oct 2006, 03:24
On the idiot box last night we had the tastefully named "Crash of the Century" show about the Tenerife crash.

They absolutely crucified the Dutch Captain in the show although, I've heard as much over the years. Just goes to show that you really are a passenger when things go freckle up in an airliner!:(

Parapunter
5th Oct 2006, 08:04
The Dutch Captain of the KLM was badly at fault in that accident - he was the Chief training captain & his FO didn't want to contradict him as he started to roll down the runway, even though the FO knew that there was another 747 on the tarmac that hadn't cleared the runway.

Instead, the FO radioed the tower with words to the effect of 'we're rolling' in the hope that ATC would intervene, tragically though, it was all realised too late to avoid the collision that killed so many people - it was more than 500 deaths IIRC. The whole thing was precipitated by a bomb scare at the original airport Las Palmas?? which meant that the alternate Los Rodeos?? was jam packed with airtcraft & fogged in too.