Planes won't fall from the sky...

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

...we were told over and over.

Now did they mean:

(1) at exactly 0:00:00 on Jan 1, 2000

or

(2) after the rollover

If they meant (1), then they were absolutely right. Problem is, everyone agreed with that statement, so that was pretty redundant and useless. Surely they must have meant (2). Boy, were they wrong...

Side note: since the rollover I haven't set foot in a plane. I travel 1200 miles per week as pre-rollover, but now in the relative safety of a train. Living in Europe I can use the super-fast trains travelling at 200 mph. All in all it costs me maybe 2 hours more per week, but it'll be a long time before I go on a plane again.

-- JD (cogito_ergo_sum@usa.net), February 02, 2000

Answers

And why, exactly, do you think trains are safer than airplanes?

-- Teague Harper (tharper@cyberhighway.net), February 02, 2000.

To me, but that's my own opinion, they look closer to the ground. So gravity will have less tendency to accelerate their fall. Furthermore they tend to be fairly alone on their tracks for a given length of time, but again that's just an opinion. On top of that they tend to start slowly and arrive slowly, according to my observations. They only gain momentum when it is safe to do so, if I trust what I see. I would even surmise that controlling the movement of trains is a walk in the park compared to controlling the movement of planes, especially during take-off and landing. But now this is complete speculation on my part.

-- JD (cogito_ergo_sum@usa.net), February 02, 2000.

You bet! And I can't wait for the usual media stories about how wonderfully SAFE flying is!!! They trot out the same moronic ditties after each and every plane crash. Sure gives me confidence! Personally I prefer my crashes to be here on the ground--gives one a reasonable chance--rather than first falling 17,000 feet at 600 mph!

The crew in the Alaska Air crash was supposedly well seasoned and highly thought of...the airline itself had never had a crash in its 24 odd year history. One, two or even ten air crashes within a short period of time may not mean anything...but what if the number keeps climbing as with the number of oil refinery 'problems'...

We live in an era where the meaning of the word 'is' is subject to legal debate by acknowledged liars...it's doubtful that we'll ever know the truth about any of the spate of curious air crashes within the past few years.

-- Doubtful (WeWillKnowThe@Truth.com), February 02, 2000.


We made reservattions at Disney the other day and have been considering flying rather then driving. I think our minds were just made up. Too precious of cargo! It's only about 10 hours from here anyway.

JD-1200 miles a week on a train you must be all over the place.

-- Johnny (jljtm@bellsouth.net), February 02, 2000.


Johnny,

It is actually a bit insane at the moment, with my work in London and my house near Switzerland. I still get to spend long week-ends home and a short week in Great Britain, but I am definitely working on changing this set-up!

-- JD (cogito_ergo_sum@usa.net), February 02, 2000.



You are trying to tell me that planes have never crashed before?? Why weren't these questions being asked for every crash since airplanes were invented? You haven't set foot on a plane since the rollover; how many flights have there been since the rollover?? I don't hear of massive plane crashes overseas.... And correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a maintenance issue with this plane predating the crash by some 18 months? Please, let's not use a tragedy to hang our fears of y2k on needlessly....

-- Robert (celtic64@inficad.com), February 02, 2000.

Considering all of the train accidents recently it sounds like you're far safer to still take to the sky. You could have one hell of a wreck at 200 MPH.

-- John Thomas (cjseed@webtv.net), February 02, 2000.

JD - You're mischaracterizing what Kosky said, which was that y2k wouldn't make planes any *less* likely to crash after rollover...

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), February 02, 2000.

You hadn't heard? EVERYTHING has to do with Y2K, else why would anyone talk about it here? And that includes

The recent OPEC oil cartel The Alaskan Air crash The decline in the stock market The subsequent rise in the stock market McCain winning in New Hampshire Gore winning in New Hampshire Clinton's longest State of the Union address in his tenure The fact that no SC justices showed up for his speech etc...etc...etc...

-- Sarcasm (is a subtle@virtue.com), February 02, 2000.


Doubtful:

Alaska Airlines has had three fatal crashes in its history, including this one. The amount of fatal air crashes has been decreasing worldwide for the last 15 years. Go to http://aviation-safety.net/. They have aircraft accident reports going back to 1945. See if you'd rather be flying then or now.

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), February 02, 2000.



But there sure seems to have been an increase in plane crashes since the CDC. Train crashes too. (and no, I have no statistics, just a gut feeling...I cant recall THIS many plane and train problems before)

-- Yebbut (yebbut@showme.com), February 02, 2000.

While we're talking latin, cogito, don't forget the most common logical fallacy, well-illustrated on this board:

Post hoc; ergo propter hoc.

After Y2K; therefore because of Y2K.

-- Imso (lame@prepped.com), February 02, 2000.


JD,

You could make the same arguments for car travel and yet statistics show that car travel is less safe than air travel. How safe do you feel in a car at 70mph on an Xway when boxed in by three 18 wheelers that might be driven by guys on speed?

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), February 02, 2000.


"How safe do you feel in a car at 70mph on an Xway when boxed in by three 18 wheelers that might be driven by guys on speed?"

Lars I feel alot safer boxed in by 18 wheelers than in an out of control nosedive from 17,000 ft. at 2 or 3 hundred mph.

You see I've been in that situation many times and was able to avoid an accident and survive.

As far as I know no one has survived the airplane scenerio.

-- Johnny (jljtm@bellsouth.net), February 02, 2000.


Take the train to Orlando...

-- Mara (MaraWayne@aol.com), February 02, 2000.


Yeah, that Orlando train is real Mickey Mouse

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), February 02, 2000.

Just for the record (from http://www.alaska-air.com/E_latest.htm---
RELEASED AT 8:10 P.M. January 31, 2000

FATAL EVENTS SINCE 1970 FOR ALASKA AIRLINES

SEATTLE - Alaska Airlines has experienced two fatal accidents since 1970. Both involved Boeing 727 aircraft:

Sept. 4, 1971: A Boeing 727 operated by Alaska Airlines suffered a controlled flight into the slopes of a mountain near Juneau, Alaska, about 28 miles west of the airport. All seven crew members and 104 passengers were killed.

April 5, 1976: A Boeing 727 operated by Alaska Airlines overran the runway after landing in Ketchikan, Alaska. Of the 50 passengers on board, one passenger died.



-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), February 03, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ