
"Holy Fucking Shit I Was Just In A Plane Crash" - astrec
http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/12/twitter-holy-fucking-shit-i-was-just-in-denver-plane-crash
======
pmorici
So, it would be ironic if, after the investigation, they determine that some
guy who was Twittering during take off interfered with the planes systems and
caused the crash.

~~~
sah
I assume that if cell phones were even a little likely to cause plane crashes,
passengers wouldn't be allowed to carry them on planes at all.

~~~
pmorici
The very slim possibility of interference is one of the main reasons they
disallow them during take off and landing, since that is the most critical
part of the flight, the other reason is passenger distraction, they want
people paying attention.

<http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2001/02/41273>

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_on_aircraft#Elect...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_on_aircraft#Electromagnetic_interference)

The reason it is unlikely is because the systems are shielded but you could
for see a situation where shoddy maintenance leads to the degradation or
removal of what ever is shielding the instrument.

------
mihasya
Dude needs a blog. Microblogging seems like the wrong medium to tell a full on
story...

~~~
yan
I doubt he would have had time to sit down and write a full-fledged blog post
on what was going on in a plane crash, as it was happening.

------
mhartl
I can't believe they actually used the slides. I kinda figured those were
mostly for show.

~~~
spolsky
How else would you get down without stairs?

They deploy automatically when you open the doors unless you specifically
disarm them.

~~~
mhartl
Well, yeah, but how else (apart from the "seat flotation devices") would you
float except the life vests? And yet, the life vests are mainly for show. As a
letter in the 2006 _Economist_ put it:

    
    
      SIR – The bright-yellow lifejackets are not intended to
      act as flotation devices. They are there to make it easier
      for the recovery services to spot the bodies strewn across 
      rough terrain. (I was once asked to put on a life-jacket 
      over central Germany, some 300 miles from the sea.) And the 
      advice to adopt a head-down fetal position in the event of 
      a crash landing does nothing to preserve life, given that 
      the stall speed of a modern airliner means it will connect 
      with the ground at terminal velocity. However, the position 
      does tend to preserve dental data, useful for identifying 
      dilapidated corpses.
    
      Roger Willis
      Peel, Isle of Man
    

I always thought the number of flights where you needed to get down without
stairs was basically nil; turns out I was wrong.

~~~
noonespecial
Ah. Letter to "the economist" in which the author demonstrates no knowledge
whatsoever about the meaning of the term "terminal velocity" and refers to
headless corpses as "dilapidated".

Now that's what I call a primary source! I'm so glad he wrote in to clear
things up for everyone.

~~~
palish
To be fair, you didn't address any of his points.

~~~
noonespecial
Ok, Lets do that.

1) The anecdote about flying over Germany: Flotation might be required even if
the plane were to slide into a shallow river or lake. I doesn't much matter if
the water is 10 feet or 100 feet deep, drowned is drowned. I have it on good
authority that Germany has rivers, even in the middle part. Flotation is
always a good idea since it can sometimes be difficult to choose exactly where
to have a plane crash... which brings us to:

2) The life jackets on a plane aren't stellar. They are likely barely
adequate. A tradeoff was made between usefulness as a flotation device and
extra weight on the plane. I hear pilots are picky about the extra weight
thing. I don't care if they're ziplock bags with straws. It beats nothing at
all. The fact that they're yellow and might help _rescue_ workers see me is
just an added bonus.

3) Terminal velocity is the constant maximum velocity reached by a body free-
falling through the atmosphere under the attraction of gravity. Its where air
resistance and acceleration from gravity are in equilibrium, producing a
constant speed. This speed is _much_ higher than the stall speed! (The stall
speed being the slowest air speed above which a plane will continue flying)
That's just nonsense. Why even bring it up?

4) The duck and cover isn't to protect you from the firey mother of all
crashes, its to protect you from that oversized tote crammed into your
overhead bin by that idiot sitting next to you during emergency maneuvers.
(And, I'm told, other misc debris). I've been on a plane where we were asked
to do this in preparation for what was expected to be a particularly hard
landing due to a nasty crosswind and blustery conditions. In said firey
mother-of-all-crashes, the final resting place of your teeth depends very
little on their initial position.

Oh and, dilapidated means "run down". (Now I'll grant you, some of the folks I
see hoofing it though the airport may fit this description, alive or dead...)
He was likely trying for decapitated, as in "without a head". This raises the
question: Is the _decapitated_ corpse the best place to be looking for teeth
for a dental match? No? Then why bother with the duck and cover?

It would be interesting to ask the guy who sent in the letter about his
opinions on the grassy knoll and area 51 as well. Actually, no, on second
thought, it wouldn't.

Now, if you will all excuse me, I really must go and remove my tongue from the
place in my cheek where it is so firmly planted.

------
mseebach
Interesting account. But is this what passes for a miraculous escape these
days?

~~~
mcargian
hmmm...plane off runway, down embankment, loses an engine, cracked fuselage,
large fire engulfs entire right side of fuselage partially melting over head
bins, making some exits on the right side unusable...yeah I think this
qualifies. I'm not sure if miraculous is the right word, but I am amazed how
many "news" stations are passing this off as nothing.

~~~
indiejade
It's the Twitter Effect, again. They're probably upset that citizens are
scooping them on "their" news story.

~~~
indiejade
Pardon me? There is nothing malicious in this statement. . . why the downmods?

~~~
brandnewlow
People disagree? I do, but didn't see fit to downmod you for it, or reply. It
was a mild disagreement. No mainstream news op is going to not cover this
because someone tweeted it out in my opinion.

