4 ms·
I think maybe you're under the impression that: 1. Passengers on JL516 were not permitted to use their phones during landing. 2. I'm proposing that we start a
by jefftk 3y ago
I think maybe you're under the impression that:
1. Passengers on JL516 were not permitted to use their phones during landing.
2. I'm proposing that we start allowing them to use their phones.
3. If we did that then all 379 passengers would have died [1] because evacuation would have taken longer than the time before the plane was engulfed in flames [2]
Except #1 isn't the case: passengers were allowed to be on their phones and were doing so. And so #2 isn't the case either: I'm proposing maintaining the status quo.
And even if we had granted #1 and #2 I don't see how you get #3 because even if the extra time were entirely eaten up by 30 distracted passengers this wouldn't get you 100% dead: people don't leave in a single batch determined by the speed of the slowest person. There are multiple parallel exits, and each exit operates serially.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38841170 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38841170
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38842440 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38842440
- throw0101d 3y ago> And even if we had granted #1 and #2 I don't see how you get #3 because even if the extra time were entirely eaten up by 30 distracted passengers this wouldn't get you 100% dead: You are right that it does not necessarily follow that 100% would be dead. AC 797 had a flash fire after 90 seconds, and only about half the people died. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_797 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_797
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]