3 ms·

>Such a system would be beneficial for other reasons as well: in many recent plane crashes, survivors have ended up wandering the area, which leads to a lot of

>Such a system would be beneficial for other reasons as well: in many recent plane crashes, survivors have ended up wandering the area, which leads to a lot of unnecessary stress for loved ones searching for them, administrative hassles for airlines and first responders, and difficulty for accident investigators. If there was a clear protocol for where to go, who to receive, and what you'd receive in the event of a crash, people would be a lot less nervous about their belongings In light of this, the phenomenon of passengers grabbing their luggage makes objective sense, and has changed my view of people trying to take their carry-on with them. FTA: >> The main reasons passengers gave for grabbing their bags was money, wallets, or credit cards, followed by work materials, keys, and medication The individualism 'above' (no particular effort on the part of airline, airport or first responders to create an environment to receive and help crash survivors) informs the individualism 'below' (one should grab one's documentation, money, means of communication etc because no immediate means of support otherwise exists). Note to self, ALWAYS grab luggage from plane wreckage.

iofj 10y ago
> In light of this, the phenomenon of passengers grabbing their luggage makes objective sense, and has changed my view of people trying to take their carry-on with them. Exactly. What happens here is simple economics, presenting a simple Nash equilibrium and everyone's complaining why nobody reacts against the equilibrium situation. Even worse, the only thing the FAA is worried about is that these things might cost the airlines money ... and that they must punish passengers to make them ignore their own judgement. There's the big fear of being stuck in a foreign country with zero means to communicate or do anything, being entirely dependent on a foreign state for aid. It's not just about money. Meanwhile the risk increase to yourself is not perceived as serious (and it probably isn't), and they're probably standing there waiting for other people to move anyway. Also of note is that plane operators are liable for damages here. Lowering the risk only saves the plane operators, airports and regulators money, whilst costing more to the passengers. Regulating 101: 1) create impossible situation, leaving people alone and helpless, do nothing about people in this situation 2) threaten to punish anyone who attempts to avoid getting into said very bad situation (coming I'm sure) 3) actually punish people for reacting sanely It would be trivial to regulate places on planes so planes can be evacuated much faster (e.g. make mandatory with of aisle double what it is now or outlaw middle seats or generally require sufficient space for passengers to move around and minimum available space for a passenger).

iofj 10y ago

> In light of this, the phenomenon of passengers grabbing their luggage makes objective sense, and has changed my view of people trying to take their carry-on with them. Exactly. What happens here is simple economics, presenting a simple Nash equilibrium and everyone's complaining why nobody reacts against the equilibrium situation. Even worse, the only thing the FAA is worried about is that these things might cost the airlines money ... and that they must punish passengers to make them ignore their own judgement. There's the big fear of being stuck in a foreign country with zero means to communicate or do anything, being entirely dependent on a foreign state for aid. It's not just about money. Meanwhile the risk increase to yourself is not perceived as serious (and it probably isn't), and they're probably standing there waiting for other people to move anyway. Also of note is that plane operators are liable for damages here. Lowering the risk only saves the plane operators, airports and regulators money, whilst costing more to the passengers. Regulating 101: 1) create impossible situation, leaving people alone and helpless, do nothing about people in this situation 2) threaten to punish anyone who attempts to avoid getting into said very bad situation (coming I'm sure) 3) actually punish people for reacting sanely It would be trivial to regulate places on planes so planes can be evacuated much faster (e.g. make mandatory with of aisle double what it is now or outlaw middle seats or generally require sufficient space for passengers to move around and minimum available space for a passenger).