If there had been a passenger in that window seat, they would have been dead. |
Stop acting like nothing else matters outside of US or Americans don’t fly outside of US. Hundreds have them kill OUTSIDE of US. |
Only if not attached with seat belt. A headrest and seat back were sucked out. |
There is a pattern of oversight failures and sloppiness with the 737 Max. People are right to be concerned. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/737-max-crashes-killed-346-were-horrific-culmination-failures-boeing-n1240192 |
The injuries would have been fatal. |
Wrong. The woman partially sucked out of the Southwest plane in 2018 was still attached by her seatbelt but the trauma to her upper body. https://abc13.com/amp/philadelphia-southwest-airlines-emergency-landing-international-airport/4691167/ |
There's no way I'm getting on one of those planes. Boeing keeps cutting corners on safety. |
I think the trauma was due to having head and torso forced through a small space. Maybe impact of glass pieces also. Although I agree there could be trauma due to shearing forces on torso. Im usually a window seat person, maybe will change to aisle from here on. |
You are absolutely right that Boeing and the FAA screwed up royally when it came to the MCAS system, and it was a glaring example of how Boeing has changed as a company. At the same time, with the modifications and improvements since then, the plane is safe enough that it's simply not worth the average person's effort to parse out the minute differences in odds of an issue between it and other plane types. There is also zero indication that the incident in yesterday's Alaska flight has anything to do with the plane design- my initial guess is a manufacturing fault that wasn't picked up in QC. Extremely rare, and can happen to anything. That's why you have multiple layers of safety systems. Those layers worked in this case. The action of grounding an entire fleet type is something that the FAA often does after an event like this, often before they have any evidence of a systemic issue, as a precaution. Is the system perfect? Of course not. As stated earlier, there are significant issues that need to be addressed, that are going to take years/decades to truly resolve. But it's short-sighted to avoid the US commercial airline system entirely, or even one jet type, because it's overall.still a very safe system, one that has performed admirably for the past 30.years especially. |
You are absolutely right. Incidents like this are so extremely rare that it's foolish to avoid flying on certain models by certain developers. Hell I don't even care to look to see who develops the planes I fly on. The best thing you can do is pay attention to the emergency exit instructions pre-flight and ensure your seatbelt is always on when you're not using the restroom. It could save your life in an emergency. |
Op - why thank you 🙂 I have very heightened anxiety and a background in journalism so my anxiety is somewhat data driven |
This sounds very impressive till you realize you can be the most elite united class of all time and you are still stuck with Polaris |
Is this intended to make people feel better? |
What do you mean the layers worked in this case? It was luck that no one was seated beside the window. A manufacturer of airplanes with QC issues is also not more reassuring than a design issue. |