5 ms·

Can you imagine leaving your laptop on a plane? In a situation like this I'd almost certainly grab that and try to take it with me. Airlines are already woefull

Can you imagine leaving your laptop on a plane? In a situation like this I'd almost certainly grab that and try to take it with me. Airlines are already woefully incompetent in the best of times with your luggage, what's even the timeline for getting this stuff back? I don't buy the whole "we need it for the investigation", buddy if something in my carry-on stopped the front landing gear from opening you've got bigger issues. It's already absurd they still go on about "airplane mode" with phones/tablets. The airline industry is so horrible to deal with.

vanattab 3y ago
The investigation is not the primary reason your told the leave your stuff its to avoid delays in an evacuation. Imagine that the plane was less lucky I fire had started in the front nose cone section. Then people trying to get there bags could jeopardize the safety of the passengers in the front of the plane.
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  You have completely miss understood the complaint. The complaint is about the FAA hold passenger items after the emergnecy is over while they "investigate" The process should be Evac -> Fire Dept clears the plane > Airline gets passengers there stuff it should not be Evac > Fire Dept > NTSB Looks at things > FAA Looks at things > Someone 3 years later Passengers get their things because the FAA as the latter policy, people will be more prone to try to take their stuff, then if they knew once evacuated they would get their belongings before leaving the airport, not at some undetermined time later FAA Policy increases the danger for everyone.
  - ithkuil 3y ago
    In other words: It's understandable that when confronted with an irresponsible behaviour of one particular person we tend to blame that person for being irresponsible. But the fact is that there will be a given number of irresponsible people around. It's also irresponsible to set up rules in such a way to make it more likely that some irresponsible people will do irresponsible things. Especially when there may be other rules that could reduce the chances.
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      That's the pure safety analysis. There's also "why are you not giving people their bags promptly, you assholes". Also important medication can get left behind, as someone else mentioned. It's worth some risk to delay for some seconds in that case, where math can tell you the exact amounts.
      - vba616 3y ago
        It's one thing to do the math to estimate how many idiots there are. It's another thing to claim that the idiots are doing the math. To describe throwing a ball, you may use calculus. But if you then reason that people who throw things must know calculus, that's going to lead to incorrect inferences and decisions. (as you may know it's not allowed to say "correlation != causation" on HN so I'm not saying that)
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        > It's another thing to claim that the idiots are doing the math. Did someone say that? If someone keeps a bag because they don't trust the airline, that's an emotional decision, not a math one.
        vba616 3y ago
        Ok. I'm maybe not following your point. Do you think the FAA's policy is a problem?
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        I do. For three reasons: 1. If people are worried nobody will get their bags for a long time, they'll be less likely to follow safety protocols and leave them behind. 2. It's bad to take people's things away for a long time. 3. Even if you assume people will obey, it can cause more harm than good in non-dire situations. None of those reasons require the passengers to be notably logical. And I have no idea what correlation you're talking about.
  - vba616 3y ago
    >because the FAA as the latter policy, people will be more prone to try to take their stuff Approximately nobody in an actual emergency has any idea of the details of FAA policies or is running through their logical implications, come ON. The reason people do stupid things is they are in shock and they revert to ingrained habits and behavior because it's really hard to do any higher level thinking at that moment.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > nobody in an actual emergency has any idea of the details of FAA policies or is running through their logical implications It certainly occurs to me now. I'm not going to pull an overhead item. But I may be more inclined to grab my laptop if it's already in the seat in front of me. More productively: if you can honestly say that passengers will get their onboard items within 7 days of an emergency during the in-flight safety message, maybe you'll influence behavior.
      - vba616 3y ago
        >if you can honestly say that passengers will get their onboard items within 7 days of an emergency You can't honestly say that...that's why it's an emergency. Everybody knows that, so you can't change behavior.
  - lxgr 3y ago
    > Someone 3 years later Passengers get their things It's been a couple of hours since the incident. I think calling three years is premature.
lxgr 3y ago
I hope I’m never on the same plane as somebody with that attitude in an emergency… Things can move from “ugh this is annoying, where is the truck with the stairs” to “the landing gear caught on fire after all” very quickly. https://www.insider.com/russian-plane-crash-aeroflot-passengers-luggage-evacuation-2019-5 https://www.insider.com/russian-plane-crash-aeroflot-passeng...
- throwawaymaths 3y ago
  There's a lot of daylight between an oh shit emergency and normal operations. For example, the plane lands without its front gear, nobody appears to be dead, there's likely limited risk of further injury and endangerment, and you're asked to depart the plane in a slightly nonstandard way.
  - lxgr 3y ago
    > you're asked to depart the plane in a slightly nonstandard way. It was quite possibly still an evacuation, in which time is of the essence. There is no "moderate urgency" evacuation protocol, and an important part of the evacuation protocol is "LEAVE YOUR LUGGAGE" (an instruction shouted continuously by the cabin crew until everyone's out). Would you rather the crew deliberate for a few moments on how likely it is that the plane still catches on fire vs. the inconvenience of not being able to bring baggage? And what if they misjudge it? You'll live without your laptop for a few days; you might not survive carrying it out of a burning aircraft.
    - midoridensha 3y ago
      What happens if someone brought their pet? Are they supposed to leave that bag behind too? (Normally, they're kept in cloth carriers under the seat, as your "personal item".)
Symbiote 3y ago
I've been through a rough emergency landing where there was a serious concern for potential fire, and I wasn't even thinking of my government-issued laptop and phone (to use the phrasing in another comment).
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  >>government-issued laptop and phone (to use the phrasing in another comment). yes if you did not pay for the items, it will not cost you anything to replace the items then doubt you would think about them... it will be shocking for you to learn that some times people travel with possessions that are not paid for by other people.
  - vba616 3y ago
    There may be some destitute jet-setters who know all FAA regulations by heart and are cool as ice when staring death in the face. I think the argument was that there aren't enough to make the contrived reasoning why the FAA is stupid for their obscure policies...fly.
  - lxgr 3y ago
    And I'd be shocked if the airline wouldn't have to compensate you for your lost property anyway (plus a little bit extra for your inconvenience).
    - phpisthebest 3y ago
      This is the same augment people use to defend theft, and claim "well it is all insured so who cares"... There is a TON of intangible loss when property is taken from the owner, does not matter if it is the FAA per policy, or a thief. Just writing a check for the value of the property does not in reality make someone whole
      - lxgr 3y ago
        No, you're pulling up a straw man argument here. I'm not arguing that there isn't such a thing as intangible value. Your original comment expressed concern about people who don't get compensated by the actual owner of their hardware; I'm saying that the airline will very likely reimburse these for the monetary value of what they've lost. Also, property theft and air travel safety investigations are a slightly different matter in my view.
version_five 3y ago
Agreed, now that I know you can't readily get your stuff back I'd definitely think more about what I'd grab to take off in an emergency. That said, my laptop, being sufficiently valuable, is also automatically and constantly backed up, so I'm not too worried about losing it in an emergency, just like I'm not worried about someone stealing it from me on the subway which I suspect is a more likely occurrence.
- lxgr 3y ago
  If you don't want to risk losing it in an emergency, keep it on your person during the flight. If it doesn't fit in your pockets, leave it: You might need your hands and want them empty. The last thing everybody on the plane needs is you fetching that one important small thing from the overhead bin/under your seat/the aisle after you dropped it/...

vanattab 3y ago

The investigation is not the primary reason your told the leave your stuff its to avoid delays in an evacuation. Imagine that the plane was less lucky I fire had started in the front nose cone section. Then people trying to get there bags could jeopardize the safety of the passengers in the front of the plane.

phpisthebest 3y ago
You have completely miss understood the complaint. The complaint is about the FAA hold passenger items after the emergnecy is over while they "investigate" The process should be Evac -> Fire Dept clears the plane > Airline gets passengers there stuff it should not be Evac > Fire Dept > NTSB Looks at things > FAA Looks at things > Someone 3 years later Passengers get their things because the FAA as the latter policy, people will be more prone to try to take their stuff, then if they knew once evacuated they would get their belongings before leaving the airport, not at some undetermined time later FAA Policy increases the danger for everyone.
- ithkuil 3y ago
  In other words: It's understandable that when confronted with an irresponsible behaviour of one particular person we tend to blame that person for being irresponsible. But the fact is that there will be a given number of irresponsible people around. It's also irresponsible to set up rules in such a way to make it more likely that some irresponsible people will do irresponsible things. Especially when there may be other rules that could reduce the chances.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    That's the pure safety analysis. There's also "why are you not giving people their bags promptly, you assholes". Also important medication can get left behind, as someone else mentioned. It's worth some risk to delay for some seconds in that case, where math can tell you the exact amounts.
    - vba616 3y ago
      It's one thing to do the math to estimate how many idiots there are. It's another thing to claim that the idiots are doing the math. To describe throwing a ball, you may use calculus. But if you then reason that people who throw things must know calculus, that's going to lead to incorrect inferences and decisions. (as you may know it's not allowed to say "correlation != causation" on HN so I'm not saying that)
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
        > It's another thing to claim that the idiots are doing the math. Did someone say that? If someone keeps a bag because they don't trust the airline, that's an emotional decision, not a math one.
        vba616 3y ago
        Ok. I'm maybe not following your point. Do you think the FAA's policy is a problem?
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        I do. For three reasons: 1. If people are worried nobody will get their bags for a long time, they'll be less likely to follow safety protocols and leave them behind. 2. It's bad to take people's things away for a long time. 3. Even if you assume people will obey, it can cause more harm than good in non-dire situations. None of those reasons require the passengers to be notably logical. And I have no idea what correlation you're talking about.
- vba616 3y ago
  >because the FAA as the latter policy, people will be more prone to try to take their stuff Approximately nobody in an actual emergency has any idea of the details of FAA policies or is running through their logical implications, come ON. The reason people do stupid things is they are in shock and they revert to ingrained habits and behavior because it's really hard to do any higher level thinking at that moment.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > nobody in an actual emergency has any idea of the details of FAA policies or is running through their logical implications It certainly occurs to me now. I'm not going to pull an overhead item. But I may be more inclined to grab my laptop if it's already in the seat in front of me. More productively: if you can honestly say that passengers will get their onboard items within 7 days of an emergency during the in-flight safety message, maybe you'll influence behavior.
    - vba616 3y ago
      >if you can honestly say that passengers will get their onboard items within 7 days of an emergency You can't honestly say that...that's why it's an emergency. Everybody knows that, so you can't change behavior.
- lxgr 3y ago
  > Someone 3 years later Passengers get their things It's been a couple of hours since the incident. I think calling three years is premature.

lxgr 3y ago

I hope I’m never on the same plane as somebody with that attitude in an emergency… Things can move from “ugh this is annoying, where is the truck with the stairs” to “the landing gear caught on fire after all” very quickly. https://www.insider.com/russian-plane-crash-aeroflot-passengers-luggage-evacuation-2019-5 https://www.insider.com/russian-plane-crash-aeroflot-passeng...

throwawaymaths 3y ago
There's a lot of daylight between an oh shit emergency and normal operations. For example, the plane lands without its front gear, nobody appears to be dead, there's likely limited risk of further injury and endangerment, and you're asked to depart the plane in a slightly nonstandard way.
- lxgr 3y ago
  > you're asked to depart the plane in a slightly nonstandard way. It was quite possibly still an evacuation, in which time is of the essence. There is no "moderate urgency" evacuation protocol, and an important part of the evacuation protocol is "LEAVE YOUR LUGGAGE" (an instruction shouted continuously by the cabin crew until everyone's out). Would you rather the crew deliberate for a few moments on how likely it is that the plane still catches on fire vs. the inconvenience of not being able to bring baggage? And what if they misjudge it? You'll live without your laptop for a few days; you might not survive carrying it out of a burning aircraft.
  - midoridensha 3y ago
    What happens if someone brought their pet? Are they supposed to leave that bag behind too? (Normally, they're kept in cloth carriers under the seat, as your "personal item".)

Symbiote 3y ago

I've been through a rough emergency landing where there was a serious concern for potential fire, and I wasn't even thinking of my government-issued laptop and phone (to use the phrasing in another comment).

phpisthebest 3y ago
>>government-issued laptop and phone (to use the phrasing in another comment). yes if you did not pay for the items, it will not cost you anything to replace the items then doubt you would think about them... it will be shocking for you to learn that some times people travel with possessions that are not paid for by other people.
- vba616 3y ago
  There may be some destitute jet-setters who know all FAA regulations by heart and are cool as ice when staring death in the face. I think the argument was that there aren't enough to make the contrived reasoning why the FAA is stupid for their obscure policies...fly.
- lxgr 3y ago
  And I'd be shocked if the airline wouldn't have to compensate you for your lost property anyway (plus a little bit extra for your inconvenience).
  - phpisthebest 3y ago
    This is the same augment people use to defend theft, and claim "well it is all insured so who cares"... There is a TON of intangible loss when property is taken from the owner, does not matter if it is the FAA per policy, or a thief. Just writing a check for the value of the property does not in reality make someone whole
    - lxgr 3y ago
      No, you're pulling up a straw man argument here. I'm not arguing that there isn't such a thing as intangible value. Your original comment expressed concern about people who don't get compensated by the actual owner of their hardware; I'm saying that the airline will very likely reimburse these for the monetary value of what they've lost. Also, property theft and air travel safety investigations are a slightly different matter in my view.

version_five 3y ago

Agreed, now that I know you can't readily get your stuff back I'd definitely think more about what I'd grab to take off in an emergency. That said, my laptop, being sufficiently valuable, is also automatically and constantly backed up, so I'm not too worried about losing it in an emergency, just like I'm not worried about someone stealing it from me on the subway which I suspect is a more likely occurrence.

lxgr 3y ago
If you don't want to risk losing it in an emergency, keep it on your person during the flight. If it doesn't fit in your pockets, leave it: You might need your hands and want them empty. The last thing everybody on the plane needs is you fetching that one important small thing from the overhead bin/under your seat/the aisle after you dropped it/...