13 ms·

How in the world would any common Russian trust an airplane in this current sanctioned state in Russia and fly in one?! Are people that brainwashed to trust th

How in the world would any common Russian trust an airplane in this current sanctioned state in Russia and fly in one?! Are people that brainwashed to trust their leader to get on a plane that doesn’t have brakes?!

actionfromafar 3y ago
I think it's simply normalisation of deviance.
rich_sasha 3y ago
Story from a friend. Once, flying on a Russian domestic airline flight, they noticed something like a little shrine at the back. Some black and white photos, flowers, mementos. They asked the cabin crew about it. Response was, well, the plane had crashed once, killing some people on board, including some staff. So they are commemorated here. But the plane is fine. Anecdote aside, it's fair to say Russia has a somewhat laissez-faire attitude to safety.
- parl_match 3y ago
  To be fair, in America I don't think we have rules against reintroducing planes involved in deadly incidents, but are still airworthy. The shrine is a bit wild, though.
  - windexh8er 3y ago
    Given the Max 8 debacle [0], I'd agree we don't seem to have many great rules around this. [0] https://apnews.com/article/boeing-max-crashes-faa-ea8fac0ad2758b08c58d2d64756fbf37 https://apnews.com/article/boeing-max-crashes-faa-ea8fac0ad2...
    - mulmen 3y ago
      The difference in this case is that when the Max-8s crashed they were no longer airworthy and were not re-flown.
      - mannykannot 3y ago
        After the 2nd. one.
        mulmen 3y ago
        None of the crashed 737 MAX-8s were ever re-flown. This is a conversation about re-flying air frames that have been involved in fatalities. Air frames here means the planes, not the model. The 737 Max-8 is a cautionary tale about a lot of things, but re-flying crashed airframes is not one of the lessons.
        mannykannot 3y ago
        You are right - my mistake.
  - anticodon 3y ago
    We have a word for US movies and books portraying Russia: "klukva" (cranberry). Because in every US made movie and US written book amount of lies and confabulations about Russian history and Russian culture is so high, that it deserves a special word. E.g. I was reading a book recently by John le Carré and had to stop after reading about 50 pages. I simply couldn't continue. E.g. there's a scene where Russian traitor comes to "Chechen" restaurant in the center of St. Petersburg, and orders only a glass of vodka. Firstly, there are no Chechen restaurants. Especially in the center of St. Petersburg. I don't know why, but anybody living here in Russia wouldn't be able to find any Chechen restaurant in Moscow or St. Petersburg. Russian, Ukranian, Thai, Chinese, Vietnamese, whatever, but not Chechen. Secondly, not all Russians drink vodka, not even majority. Vodka is considered a drink for poor and alcoholics. I don't think it's true, I think that vodka is superior to many other spirits, but that's the typical Russian stereotype. Thirdly, Russian people never order just vodka. We always drink vodka together with substantial food. Not only it is considered a very poor taste to drink vodka without food, it's also absolutely not enjoyable to consume it this way. And on the cover of the book it was written that the story is very close to the truth, which makes Le Carré special. OMG. So, this whole story about a shrine in a plane is bullshit.
    - woodruffw 3y ago
      I don't doubt for a minute that Western media is filled with all kinds of ridiculous apocrypha about Russia. At the same time, I've never encountered this kind of ridiculous sensitivity about a country's perception before. Do you think every American drives a pickup truck and owns 12 guns? You probably don't, because you're not a fool; similarly, most Americans don't think that Russians live their lives swizzling vodka in Chechen restaurants. Le Carré is a novelist, not a biographer.
      - anticodon 3y ago
        > I don't doubt for a minute that Western media is filled with all kinds of ridiculous apocrypha about Russia. At the same time, I've never encountered this kind of ridiculous sensitivity about a country's perception before. You won't find many Russian authors vilifying USA habits and culture. Not among popular ones, for sure. Nor the Russian movies. That makes a difference. When there's a Russian in the US movie, I mentally prepare myself for a cringe. Usually, it would be a unreasonably aggressive person, killer or terrorist, or just a bad person. Drinking vodka like water, beating women, etc, etc. You'd have hard time finding anything resembling this in Russian books or movies about USA.
- wkat4242 3y ago
  In the West airplanes are also repaired and put back in service after a crash where possible.
  - netsharc 3y ago
    E.g. Qantas' fix to maintain a no hull-loss accidents: https://simpleflying.com/qantas-flight-1-runway-excursion-anniversary/ https://simpleflying.com/qantas-flight-1-runway-excursion-an... > However, the aircraft took on severe damage. Its nose and right wing collapsed, and the two right wing engines were damaged. While Qantas did not disclose an exact figure, it cost the carrier less than AU$100 million in repairs, which was significantly cheaper than buying a new 747 at the time. > Repairing and returning the aircraft to service also helped Qantas maintain its record of having no hull-loss accidents upon the rise of the Jet Age at the time, which also meant the carrier could uphold its safety reputation.
- oceanplexian 3y ago
  I flew on a Russian domestic flight 10-ish years ago, and people were still lighting up cigarettes on the plane if that says anything.
  - foverzar 3y ago
    Weird, smoking on civillian aircrafts was forbidden in 2002.
    - xp84 3y ago
      2002 was only 8-9 years ago. Source: am a millennial, the math checks out for me
  - vGPU 3y ago
    You might want to check what year it is. There are only two countries that have allowed smoking on planes in the past decade: Cuba, and China. Both have banned it. China was the last to do so, with their ban on pilots smoking that only began getting enforced in 2019.
- vGPU 3y ago
  Air Canada 143. JAL2. Just a few of the airplanes that have crashed and been put back into service. It’s pretty common so long as it’s economic. Otherwise, they’ll get stripped for parts.
throwawaysleep 3y ago
Life matters not there. Not in war. Not in peace. Not in travel. Not in home. Most Western countries obsess about proventing deaths. The USA does as well, except among poor people and gun victims.
- trefoiled 3y ago
  this is just open racism
  - wkat4242 3y ago
    I think it's more directed to the regime not valuing citizen lives rather than racism against Russians?
    - trefoiled 3y ago
      It quite explicitly says "not in home"
    - foverzar 3y ago
      Technically there is no way it could be definded as "racism" (Russian is not a race). But IDK what would be a proper term for a cituation when a person doesn't like something about the politics of higher government echelons and starts filling blanks by projecting it down to every comissioner, manager, certification auditor, mechanic or even every household?
      - vbezhenar 3y ago
        Chauvinism, xenophobia.
- mighmi 3y ago
  > The USA does as well, except among poor people and gun victims. I suggest you look at the actual causes of death in the US: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db456.htm#section_4 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db456.htm#secti... Considering typical health outcomes in the US, obesity and the life choices people make, I don't think you can honestly say the US obsesses about preventing deaths. Of course, improved health care access and personal health wouldn't materially change the numbers, just the ages where those end of life diseases finally win. A magnitude less than the causes there, car crashes are around 12.9/100,000, and guns are at 10/100,000 (54% suicides, 1% "accidents") - and the US car death rate is significantly higher than Europe or elsewhere, very preventable with more stringent driving tests and lower blood alcohol level allowances.
vkou 3y ago
> How in the world would any common Russian trust an airplane in this current sanctioned state in Russia and fly in one?! 1. What are the alternatives? Spend five days traveling by rail? 2. It's probably still safer, per mile traveled, than my driving commute, and I don't give climbing into a car a second thought.
- blibble 3y ago
  > 2. It's probably still safer, per mile traveled, than my driving commute, and I don't give climbing into a car a second thought. maybe at the start when everything was within its specified flying hours but after a few years it's going to be way worse
  - vkou 3y ago
    If driving were 10 times more dangerous than it is now, we'd all still be doing it.
    - blibble 3y ago
      your lifetime risk of dying in a motor accident is about 1 in 100 (depending on where in the world you live) I suspect you'd see fewer people driving if it was 1 in 10
      - vkou 3y ago
        > I suspect you'd see fewer people driving if it was 1 in 10 Everybody dies, and I need to get to work/see grandma/go to the grocery. People drove about as much in the 60s, when the per-vehicle mile travel deaths in the US were 5 times what they are today.
      - serf 3y ago
        >I suspect you'd see fewer people driving if it was 1 in 10 I don't. The cohort of people that make risk assessments with regards to routine every-day things and change their plans accordingly is minuscule, and most places around the world do not have an equivalent form of transportation. Even with minor/un-needed activities people tend to ignore risk. Every cigarette smoker over a long enough period will develop health problems and eventually die faster than they would have otherwise, but it's still a thing; and it doesn't offer the advantage of actually facilitating getting to work on time and feeding your family.
bunga-bunga 3y ago
You vastly overestimate the possibility that this news makes it into the mind of fliers and that they actually understand the consequences. Government says it’s ok, so it must be ok. That’s all people think.
keddad 3y ago
I flew from Moscow to Vladivastok recently, and it's a choice between 8 hour flight and a week in a train. The planes might be missing some maintenance, but they are certainly not falling out of the skies, and it's not like the trains can't fail (especially considering occasional train tracks sabotages). There are always risks, it's not that big of a deal.
- mudil 3y ago
  Good luck with this logic.
  - keddad 3y ago
    What is the alternative, curl up and cry? Doing anything (especially anything interesting) involves taking risks. Not to mention that I probably have more chances of being arrested or conscripted then actually suffering in an airplane accident, they are still quite safe. I don't think that worrying about everything, especially things as basic as an airplane travel, will do you any good.
    - HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
      One of the surprising things I've learned in this online world of ours is that some people simply worry about everything. I don't get it either.
- woodruffw 3y ago
  I think the more apples-to-apples comparison here would be a train without breaks, wouldn't it be? After all, people can sabotage airfields and airplanes as well.
  - krisoft 3y ago
    > I think the more apples-to-apples comparison here would be a train without breaks, wouldn't it be No. Not really. Russia has the means to produce brakes for their trains. They do not have the means to do the same for these airplanes. So the reality on the ground is that the trains have brakes while the airplanes don't (or they have breaks but with rapidly aging out of compliance parts.)
daxuak 3y ago
Like they have a choice.
dharmab 3y ago
Possibly apocryphal Soviet folk song about airline travel: Tu-104 is the best plane in the world / In only 5 minutes it will bring you to your tomb. Should've gone via train / Should've gone via train.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
WeylandYutani 3y ago
Recently read Derk Sauers autobiography on his 30 years of living and doing business in Russia. Russians are... different from us. The vodka stereotype is real and combine that with melancholy and religion they are all kamikaze.
protocolture 3y ago
I mean. Consider the recent issues with the FAA and Boeing. People kept getting on those planes.
- jrockway 3y ago
  The fleet was grounded for nearly 2 years while Boeing fixed the design flaw and applied the fix to the existing airframes. So they're probably OK now. The whole point of the MAX program was to get a few more years out of a 1960s design with a couple tweaks. Hopefully all the tweaks that cause the plane to dive into the ground are fixed now, simply because there can only be so many tweaks. I enjoyed this snippet from Wikipedia: > In March 2022, there were rumors that Boeing would request an exemption from the U.S. Aircraft Safety and Certification Reform Act of 2020, a safety reform law passed in response to the MAX crashes. The act requires airliners to be fitted with an engine-indicating and crew-alerting system (EICAS) if type certificated after December 31, 2022. [...] In December 2022, the U.S. Congress agreed on a bill allowing Boeing to certify the MAX 7 and MAX 10 without EICAS, but it must install a third angle-of-attack sensor in all 737 MAX types as previously demanded by European and Canadian regulators. The company also must install a switch to disable the stick shaker, which distracted pilots during the MAX crashes. Boeing would have to retrofit these design changes to all 737 MAXs already delivered in Canada, Europe, and the U.S. within three years of MAX 10 certification. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX This all sounds like a great idea to me. What could go wrong?
berkes 3y ago
I won't be surprised if the narrative within Russia reframes this to "Western airplanes are inferior to Russian planes. So for your security we have grounded all Boeings and Airbuses" in near future. I can only hope this happens before western planes start dropping out of the sky due to missing parts.
Eavolution 3y ago
If a regular russian businessman needs to get from one side of russia, to the other, what else can they do? Russia's a big country like.

actionfromafar 3y ago

I think it's simply normalisation of deviance.

rich_sasha 3y ago

Story from a friend. Once, flying on a Russian domestic airline flight, they noticed something like a little shrine at the back. Some black and white photos, flowers, mementos. They asked the cabin crew about it. Response was, well, the plane had crashed once, killing some people on board, including some staff. So they are commemorated here. But the plane is fine. Anecdote aside, it's fair to say Russia has a somewhat laissez-faire attitude to safety.

parl_match 3y ago
To be fair, in America I don't think we have rules against reintroducing planes involved in deadly incidents, but are still airworthy. The shrine is a bit wild, though.
- windexh8er 3y ago
  Given the Max 8 debacle [0], I'd agree we don't seem to have many great rules around this. [0] https://apnews.com/article/boeing-max-crashes-faa-ea8fac0ad2758b08c58d2d64756fbf37 https://apnews.com/article/boeing-max-crashes-faa-ea8fac0ad2...
  - mulmen 3y ago
    The difference in this case is that when the Max-8s crashed they were no longer airworthy and were not re-flown.
    - mannykannot 3y ago
      After the 2nd. one.
      - mulmen 3y ago
        None of the crashed 737 MAX-8s were ever re-flown. This is a conversation about re-flying air frames that have been involved in fatalities. Air frames here means the planes, not the model. The 737 Max-8 is a cautionary tale about a lot of things, but re-flying crashed airframes is not one of the lessons.
        mannykannot 3y ago
        You are right - my mistake.
- anticodon 3y ago
  We have a word for US movies and books portraying Russia: "klukva" (cranberry). Because in every US made movie and US written book amount of lies and confabulations about Russian history and Russian culture is so high, that it deserves a special word. E.g. I was reading a book recently by John le Carré and had to stop after reading about 50 pages. I simply couldn't continue. E.g. there's a scene where Russian traitor comes to "Chechen" restaurant in the center of St. Petersburg, and orders only a glass of vodka. Firstly, there are no Chechen restaurants. Especially in the center of St. Petersburg. I don't know why, but anybody living here in Russia wouldn't be able to find any Chechen restaurant in Moscow or St. Petersburg. Russian, Ukranian, Thai, Chinese, Vietnamese, whatever, but not Chechen. Secondly, not all Russians drink vodka, not even majority. Vodka is considered a drink for poor and alcoholics. I don't think it's true, I think that vodka is superior to many other spirits, but that's the typical Russian stereotype. Thirdly, Russian people never order just vodka. We always drink vodka together with substantial food. Not only it is considered a very poor taste to drink vodka without food, it's also absolutely not enjoyable to consume it this way. And on the cover of the book it was written that the story is very close to the truth, which makes Le Carré special. OMG. So, this whole story about a shrine in a plane is bullshit.
  - woodruffw 3y ago
    I don't doubt for a minute that Western media is filled with all kinds of ridiculous apocrypha about Russia. At the same time, I've never encountered this kind of ridiculous sensitivity about a country's perception before. Do you think every American drives a pickup truck and owns 12 guns? You probably don't, because you're not a fool; similarly, most Americans don't think that Russians live their lives swizzling vodka in Chechen restaurants. Le Carré is a novelist, not a biographer.
    - anticodon 3y ago
      > I don't doubt for a minute that Western media is filled with all kinds of ridiculous apocrypha about Russia. At the same time, I've never encountered this kind of ridiculous sensitivity about a country's perception before. You won't find many Russian authors vilifying USA habits and culture. Not among popular ones, for sure. Nor the Russian movies. That makes a difference. When there's a Russian in the US movie, I mentally prepare myself for a cringe. Usually, it would be a unreasonably aggressive person, killer or terrorist, or just a bad person. Drinking vodka like water, beating women, etc, etc. You'd have hard time finding anything resembling this in Russian books or movies about USA.
wkat4242 3y ago
In the West airplanes are also repaired and put back in service after a crash where possible.
- netsharc 3y ago
  E.g. Qantas' fix to maintain a no hull-loss accidents: https://simpleflying.com/qantas-flight-1-runway-excursion-anniversary/ https://simpleflying.com/qantas-flight-1-runway-excursion-an... > However, the aircraft took on severe damage. Its nose and right wing collapsed, and the two right wing engines were damaged. While Qantas did not disclose an exact figure, it cost the carrier less than AU$100 million in repairs, which was significantly cheaper than buying a new 747 at the time. > Repairing and returning the aircraft to service also helped Qantas maintain its record of having no hull-loss accidents upon the rise of the Jet Age at the time, which also meant the carrier could uphold its safety reputation.
oceanplexian 3y ago
I flew on a Russian domestic flight 10-ish years ago, and people were still lighting up cigarettes on the plane if that says anything.
- foverzar 3y ago
  Weird, smoking on civillian aircrafts was forbidden in 2002.
  - xp84 3y ago
    2002 was only 8-9 years ago. Source: am a millennial, the math checks out for me
- vGPU 3y ago
  You might want to check what year it is. There are only two countries that have allowed smoking on planes in the past decade: Cuba, and China. Both have banned it. China was the last to do so, with their ban on pilots smoking that only began getting enforced in 2019.
vGPU 3y ago
Air Canada 143. JAL2. Just a few of the airplanes that have crashed and been put back into service. It’s pretty common so long as it’s economic. Otherwise, they’ll get stripped for parts.

throwawaysleep 3y ago

Life matters not there. Not in war. Not in peace. Not in travel. Not in home. Most Western countries obsess about proventing deaths. The USA does as well, except among poor people and gun victims.

trefoiled 3y ago
this is just open racism
- wkat4242 3y ago
  I think it's more directed to the regime not valuing citizen lives rather than racism against Russians?
  - trefoiled 3y ago
    It quite explicitly says "not in home"
  - foverzar 3y ago
    Technically there is no way it could be definded as "racism" (Russian is not a race). But IDK what would be a proper term for a cituation when a person doesn't like something about the politics of higher government echelons and starts filling blanks by projecting it down to every comissioner, manager, certification auditor, mechanic or even every household?
    - vbezhenar 3y ago
      Chauvinism, xenophobia.
mighmi 3y ago
> The USA does as well, except among poor people and gun victims. I suggest you look at the actual causes of death in the US: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db456.htm#section_4 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db456.htm#secti... Considering typical health outcomes in the US, obesity and the life choices people make, I don't think you can honestly say the US obsesses about preventing deaths. Of course, improved health care access and personal health wouldn't materially change the numbers, just the ages where those end of life diseases finally win. A magnitude less than the causes there, car crashes are around 12.9/100,000, and guns are at 10/100,000 (54% suicides, 1% "accidents") - and the US car death rate is significantly higher than Europe or elsewhere, very preventable with more stringent driving tests and lower blood alcohol level allowances.

vkou 3y ago

> How in the world would any common Russian trust an airplane in this current sanctioned state in Russia and fly in one?! 1. What are the alternatives? Spend five days traveling by rail? 2. It's probably still safer, per mile traveled, than my driving commute, and I don't give climbing into a car a second thought.

blibble 3y ago
> 2. It's probably still safer, per mile traveled, than my driving commute, and I don't give climbing into a car a second thought. maybe at the start when everything was within its specified flying hours but after a few years it's going to be way worse
- vkou 3y ago
  If driving were 10 times more dangerous than it is now, we'd all still be doing it.
  - blibble 3y ago
    your lifetime risk of dying in a motor accident is about 1 in 100 (depending on where in the world you live) I suspect you'd see fewer people driving if it was 1 in 10
    - vkou 3y ago
      > I suspect you'd see fewer people driving if it was 1 in 10 Everybody dies, and I need to get to work/see grandma/go to the grocery. People drove about as much in the 60s, when the per-vehicle mile travel deaths in the US were 5 times what they are today.
    - serf 3y ago
      >I suspect you'd see fewer people driving if it was 1 in 10 I don't. The cohort of people that make risk assessments with regards to routine every-day things and change their plans accordingly is minuscule, and most places around the world do not have an equivalent form of transportation. Even with minor/un-needed activities people tend to ignore risk. Every cigarette smoker over a long enough period will develop health problems and eventually die faster than they would have otherwise, but it's still a thing; and it doesn't offer the advantage of actually facilitating getting to work on time and feeding your family.

bunga-bunga 3y ago

You vastly overestimate the possibility that this news makes it into the mind of fliers and that they actually understand the consequences. Government says it’s ok, so it must be ok. That’s all people think.

keddad 3y ago

I flew from Moscow to Vladivastok recently, and it's a choice between 8 hour flight and a week in a train. The planes might be missing some maintenance, but they are certainly not falling out of the skies, and it's not like the trains can't fail (especially considering occasional train tracks sabotages). There are always risks, it's not that big of a deal.

mudil 3y ago
Good luck with this logic.
- keddad 3y ago
  What is the alternative, curl up and cry? Doing anything (especially anything interesting) involves taking risks. Not to mention that I probably have more chances of being arrested or conscripted then actually suffering in an airplane accident, they are still quite safe. I don't think that worrying about everything, especially things as basic as an airplane travel, will do you any good.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
    One of the surprising things I've learned in this online world of ours is that some people simply worry about everything. I don't get it either.
woodruffw 3y ago
I think the more apples-to-apples comparison here would be a train without breaks, wouldn't it be? After all, people can sabotage airfields and airplanes as well.
- krisoft 3y ago
  > I think the more apples-to-apples comparison here would be a train without breaks, wouldn't it be No. Not really. Russia has the means to produce brakes for their trains. They do not have the means to do the same for these airplanes. So the reality on the ground is that the trains have brakes while the airplanes don't (or they have breaks but with rapidly aging out of compliance parts.)

daxuak 3y ago

Like they have a choice.

dharmab 3y ago

Possibly apocryphal Soviet folk song about airline travel: Tu-104 is the best plane in the world / In only 5 minutes it will bring you to your tomb. Should've gone via train / Should've gone via train.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

WeylandYutani 3y ago

Recently read Derk Sauers autobiography on his 30 years of living and doing business in Russia. Russians are... different from us. The vodka stereotype is real and combine that with melancholy and religion they are all kamikaze.

protocolture 3y ago

I mean. Consider the recent issues with the FAA and Boeing. People kept getting on those planes.

jrockway 3y ago
The fleet was grounded for nearly 2 years while Boeing fixed the design flaw and applied the fix to the existing airframes. So they're probably OK now. The whole point of the MAX program was to get a few more years out of a 1960s design with a couple tweaks. Hopefully all the tweaks that cause the plane to dive into the ground are fixed now, simply because there can only be so many tweaks. I enjoyed this snippet from Wikipedia: > In March 2022, there were rumors that Boeing would request an exemption from the U.S. Aircraft Safety and Certification Reform Act of 2020, a safety reform law passed in response to the MAX crashes. The act requires airliners to be fitted with an engine-indicating and crew-alerting system (EICAS) if type certificated after December 31, 2022. [...] In December 2022, the U.S. Congress agreed on a bill allowing Boeing to certify the MAX 7 and MAX 10 without EICAS, but it must install a third angle-of-attack sensor in all 737 MAX types as previously demanded by European and Canadian regulators. The company also must install a switch to disable the stick shaker, which distracted pilots during the MAX crashes. Boeing would have to retrofit these design changes to all 737 MAXs already delivered in Canada, Europe, and the U.S. within three years of MAX 10 certification. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX This all sounds like a great idea to me. What could go wrong?

berkes 3y ago

I won't be surprised if the narrative within Russia reframes this to "Western airplanes are inferior to Russian planes. So for your security we have grounded all Boeings and Airbuses" in near future. I can only hope this happens before western planes start dropping out of the sky due to missing parts.

Eavolution 3y ago

If a regular russian businessman needs to get from one side of russia, to the other, what else can they do? Russia's a big country like.