• Troy
    link
    fedilink
    4511 hours ago

    Crash survival statistics are actually quite surprising. Like, you have higher survivability odds in the back of the plane – cause everyone in front of you is your crumple zone.

    • ArtieShaw
      link
      fedilink
      209 hours ago

      About 20 years ago I read a grim book about plane crashes. They claimed that the number 1 predictor of crash survivability on commercial craft was being a male between the ages of 20 and 50. They’re apparently much better equipped to claw and climb over the other passengers on the way out.

      Grim. I fly a lot and think about it at least every other trip.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        13 hours ago

        Well, also that being bigger means you’re less vulnerable to smoke or toxic has inhalation, which is what kills most people.

    • @RegalPotoo
      link
      English
      2910 hours ago

      Planes rarely reverse into mountains.

      And the survival statistics have a lot to do with the amount of work that has been put into making the worst case “controlled descent into terrain” scenario exceptionally rare.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      119 hours ago

      Like, you have higher survivability odds in the back of the plane

      But when you’re sitting in the front during a crash the snack cart comes by one more time.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1510 hours ago

      The stats of surviving in a plane are quite high.

      The stats of surviving in a plane with at least one death are very low.

      Usually, if anyone dies, everyone dies.

      • @Frozengyro
        link
        149 hours ago

        No, people die on planes all the time. Almost 3 million people fly daily, I’m guessing people die in flight almost every day due to natural causes.

        However, I’m sure the stats with 2+ people dying, survival odds are quite low.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          108 hours ago

          Honestly I wasn’t going to bother specifying this but yes obviously you’re correct. Alternatively it can be thought of as, “in a plane accident, if anyone dies, usually everyone dies”

          • @Frozengyro
            link
            36 hours ago

            Fair enough, I just figured since we were being particular, better specify lol

      • Troy
        link
        fedilink
        10
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        Almost certainly true of ocean landings. But I’ve spent a lot of time in bush planes (no crashes, knock on wood). I’ve had colleagues survive crashes where others have died. Perhaps it is sample bias, or something particularly about remote crashes.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Air_Flight_6560 – two of the survivors were in the back, both working for our company. After the crash: one never returned, one just quiet quit over the next year or two.

        https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/yellowknife-plane-crash-kills-2-people-1.987369 – this plane crashed into our office building, killing the pilots, but the passengers all survived. I wasn’t there, but coworkers would often describe the experience inside the building.

        It happens often enough that I have two examples where I’m only one degree of separation.

        I had two colleagues survive a helicopter crash into a lake at full speed (calm day, no waves, pilot lost track of where the surface was) – one of my coworked was ejected out the front window of the helicopter (seatbelt was on). Didn’t even warrant a news story. But everyone survived this one, which may be a data point in your favour.

        I don’t have an actual source for stats. Got anything?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          7
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          Jesus Christ what kind of work do you do

          As far as source, my ass. I heard it somewhere else (talking about commercial airliners) and it passed the smell test

          • Troy
            link
            fedilink
            68 hours ago

            At the time, arctic mineral exploration. However I blew out my knee and started a business with lower personal risk (equipment targeting the same market) ;)

            Free photo – me doing science in the arctic in winter (February, so the sun is up) with curious caribou checking it out

              • Troy
                link
                fedilink
                27 hours ago

                Kind of. My own business will probably needs to hire a tech sometime in the next six months. Ideally someone technically inclined with a steady hand (who can be trained to solder connectors onto cables, etc.)

                Oh, the arctic exploration stuff? My old employer is Aurora Geoscience – they have a careers page. There are others like them, depending on your citizenship and location. Many of these companies will hire labourers and semi-skilled technicians who want the lifestyle. You won’t get paid a lot – but it’s kind of like the military experience without the guns and you come out knowing how to do a lot of shit. A good life experience. :)

                • @TexasDrunk
                  link
                  24 hours ago

                  I wish I had known about that when I was younger. I would have done that instead of the military.

          • @TexasDrunk
            link
            38 hours ago

            Test pilot for planes put together by drunks.

    • @HappycamperNZ
      link
      37 hours ago

      Jump seat behind pilot for helicopters, I assume due to the supporting framework from the engines and not in blade range.

      Middle of planes over the wing root - easy access to exits, crumple zone infront, not going with the tail if it hits, and strongest part of aircraft. Also right over a fuel tanks, so results vary.

    • @Siethron
      link
      27 hours ago

      You also have hugely increased survival odds with backwards seats.

    • @someguy3
      link
      410 hours ago

      I think this every time I’m the back which is loud because of the engines.

      • ArtieShaw
        link
        fedilink
        59 hours ago

        I’m sensitive to noise, and usually book late enough that the only seats available are in back. And fly at least once a month.

        Absolutely decent noise cancelling headphones are available for under $70 US last time I bought some. Mine were called Q30 or something, and they were better than my Sennheisers from 2016-ish. Worth every bit. If one can afford a ticket, one can afford this one thing to make it less awful.

        • Troy
          link
          fedilink
          28 hours ago

          I concur. I went high end though with Sennhauser cause I’m a nerd. Great investment.

        • @someguy3
          link
          29 hours ago

          Yeah I rarely fly so I don’t bother.

      • Rhaedas
        link
        fedilink
        16 hours ago

        Actually…nah, I’m not going there. But if you watched Lost, you know what I’m going to say.