View Full Version : A Question was Asked

18th Jan 2009, 09:47
" ... why do these crashes always seem to elicit an awful lot of interest?"

Because as professionals in various aspects of the industry we care greatly about what we do and the human beings who use our services. When things go wrong we are devastated and want desparately to find causation and correction.

I was once interviewed and I came up with what seems to be my best quote.

" An aircraft flight is a complex event in a dangerous environment and there is no room for errors ".

18th Jan 2009, 10:05
Indeed that's true. As a pilot I naturally maintain an interest in crashes that is more than merely morbid because one day that could be me. Every accident add to the knowledge pool. Better for me to learn from other pilots scary moment.

On the other hand the average punter is fascinated by 'plane crashes' because in their ordinary lives most fly and it always crosses their mind that this flight 'could be the one'.

18th Jan 2009, 10:06
I would say that errors are expected. It's when many errors reinforce each other that disasters happen. Holes in the cheese etc. A single error should not fail a transport aircraft.

18th Jan 2009, 11:01
So what is the excuse of rubber neckers at road accidents?

18th Jan 2009, 11:37
"So what is the excuse of rubber neckers at road accidents?"

a) That could be be me - thankfully I'm too smart for that to happen to me.
b) Look at that idiot - he deserves what he got
c) Poor fools, they are really unlucky.

The rubberneckers are looking at something that could never happen to them because they live right/are lucky/are smart or know better.
Human beings are a strange bunch.

18th Jan 2009, 11:52
Let's face it, there is always a fascination with the mis-fortune
that befalls others.
The sort of accident that generally CAN'T ever happen to you.
Hopefully! :rolleyes:

jetset lady
18th Jan 2009, 16:01
I nearly got arrested once, for trying to drag a rubber necker out of his car so he could have a "closer look".... :(

Sorry, total thread drift!

Scumbag O'Riley
18th Jan 2009, 17:55
Cannot say this one interests me, am waiting for a proper video of the landing to come out just to see how the aircraft contacted the water, must have been pretty smooth. Credit to the engineers who built it and the handling pilot who must have been under intense pressure.

The BA 777 at LHR did because of the engineering aspects of two engines failing at the same time when it has never happened before in many years of service.

Which was the one before that?

Peter Fanelli
18th Jan 2009, 18:08
What about the BA 747 on which all 4 engines failed due to ash ingestion.

18th Jan 2009, 18:18
Why is the person driving a vehicle on the ground dismissed as a 'rubbernecker' if he's curious about an accident involving a vehicle on the ground?

Because when they eventually get to the head of the queue of traffic easing past a road accident they swivel their head 180 degrees in order to get a really good look instead of looking ahead and driving away as soon as safe to do so. Like they have rubber necks. Their behaviour makes the jam many times worse than needed.

18th Jan 2009, 18:34
Scumbag...cnn.com has a few videos showing the landing and the pilot has made some statements about the incident. The saw the flock of geese. F/O flying at the time. Capt took over when both engines shut down. They never had a chance to hit the ditch switch. Here's a bit of info from a Yahoo news site regarding the NTSB interview of crew:

Sullenberger recounted seeing his windshield filled with big, dark-brown birds.
"His instinct was to duck," Higgins said, recounting their interview. Then there was a thump, the smell of burning birds, and silence as both aircraft engines cut out.
After the impact, Sullenberger told investigators he immediately took over flying from his co-pilot and decided it would be too dangerous to attempt a landing at the smaller Teterboro Airport in New Jersey.
"We can't do it," he told air traffic controllers. "We're gonna be in the Hudson."
"Brace! Brace! Head down!" the flight attendants shouted to the passengers.
Security cameras on a Manhattan pier captured the Airbus A320 as it descended in a controlled glide, then threw up spray as it slid across the river on its belly.

Two flight attendants likened it to a hard landing nothing more. There was one impact, no bounce, then a gradual deceleration. It all happened so fast, the crew never threw the aircraft's "ditch switch," which seals off vents in the fuselage to make it more seaworthy.

Loose rivets
18th Jan 2009, 18:35
So what is the excuse of rubber neckers at road accidents?

The safety officer of our pistol club was one of the first police drivers to attend the Trident, 'Papa India' accident. He told me that people stopping to look could have possibly stopped EMS vehicles reaching the scene in time to save (? quantity) of the passengers. The impact was largely vertical, and initial inspection seemed to indicate that there might be survivors.

Why the interest in crashes? Well, for the entire working lives of pilots, it's the thing that we were trained to avoid doing. To see what it was - that we were supposed to not do - is of course a fundamental driving force to help us not do it. :}

18th Jan 2009, 19:31
Personally speaking, I like the forensic side of things and am curious about the causes and details that produce the outcome. Photos become an intriguing element to the mystery of an event. I am also a fan of criminal forensics. I find it fascinating how things can be broken down, fact by fact. One may see it as morbid, but I don't.

18th Jan 2009, 19:43
So what is the excuse of rubber neckers at road accidents?

Some people are just ghouls, plain and simple. Not very palatable, but that's human nature for you.

Scumbag O'Riley
18th Jan 2009, 20:20
cnn.com has a few videos showing the landing and the pilot has made some statements about the incident.Thanks CityOfFlight, have seen some poor quality videos but guess I am after high resolution ones where you can see good details. For instance, when the engine pods separated, as designed. The way these planes are built are fascinating/amazing. The engineering behind them are quite impressive.

As for rubber necking, I suppose it is such a common thing to do that it must be considered normal. No idea if it is something that is inherent in humans. I know I will take a look if the road ahead is clear and safe to do so.

Beatriz Fontana
18th Jan 2009, 20:33
I suppose it is such a common thing to do that it must be considered normal.

Yep, like attending public executions in Tudor England and watching gladiators fight to the death. And, perhaps, watching ski jumping. :cool:

19th Jan 2009, 03:22
Yep, like attending public executions in Tudor England and watching gladiators fight to the death.

Don't know how the orginal question dwindled down to this. :confused: I must be missing the intent of the original poster.

Howard Hughes
19th Jan 2009, 03:30
when the engine pods separated, as designed.
Footage I saw of the aircraft being removed from the Hudson, showed at least one engine pod still firmly in place! :eek: Despite earlier reports that both engines were 'torn off'...