Originally posted by Evan
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Safety or stupidity?
Collapse
X
-
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
-
Originally posted by Gabriel View Post...turn it back on at the slightest bump, and then leave it on...Sometimes I think they are just sloppy and forget. Sometimes I think it is intentional...Of course, when people do get up (we have no other choice) the FAs don't say a thing. This kind of attitude only provokes a diminishing respect for the seatbelt sign...Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
Comment
-
beg to differ with you given you vast expertise, but being anti-establishment doesn't mean i don't abide by rules. further, these FARS did not come about as a result of lawsuits. rather, the mystery of being inside an aluminum tube that has the potential to be deadly, but very rarely is, especially on the ground!
you completely ignore the unavoidable truth that the regs are backward from a safety perspective. the rules totally permit the non-use of seatbelts during cruise but mandate them during taxi. we have discussed ad nauseum the failure of pax to use seatbelts during cruise because the light was off. we've debated the propriety of allowing pax to walk around etc etc.
you can't argue with physics: the chances of being injured in a taxi accident are far less than those brought about as a result of unexpected turbulence.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TeeVee View Postbeg to differ with you given you vast expertise, but being anti-establishment doesn't mean i don't abide by rules. further, these FARS did not come about as a result of lawsuits. rather, the mystery of being inside an aluminum tube that has the potential to be deadly, but very rarely is, especially on the ground!
you completely ignore the unavoidable truth that the regs are backward from a safety perspective. the rules totally permit the non-use of seatbelts during cruise but mandate them during taxi. we have discussed ad nauseum the failure of pax to use seatbelts during cruise because the light was off. we've debated the propriety of allowing pax to walk around etc etc.
you can't argue with physics: the chances of being injured in a taxi accident are far less than those brought about as a result of unexpected turbulence.
Yes, the cabin crews are forced to be inflexible on that. The gods who gave us incredibly safe aviation probably don't trust the cabin crews to improvise on this. And then there's excessive lawyering, which has led us into an age of 'better-safe-than-logical (BSTL)' corporate policies.
I agree with you on one point: society today is harangued by a mess of broadly-painted and inflexible rules authored by dimwitted bureacratic minions. But in the case of aviation safety, it somehow works.
Comment
Comment