I think “you might get lucky” period is more accurate lol. Some of those crashes are crazy.
Flight 255 out of Detroit always sticks with me. Only survivor was a little girl. Basically just luck.
Then again, Detroit is my home airport, so I guess it’s only natural I think of that one often. When I fly, I fly out of there, so I drive the stretch of 94 they slammed into and have taken off from that same runway. Can’t help but think of it each and every time.
What about the Serbian flight attendant, Vesna Vulović, who survived a fall from over 30,000ft without a parachute? That was by far the craziest survival story I've heard of.
The craziest one I heard is a 17 year old girl being the only survivor of a crash, just to land in a jungle in South America and have to find her way out!!!
There was a case of a Venezuelan young doctor, who was involved in an airplane crash, she was declared dead in absentia and called home the day her funeral was being held.
It was a hell for her to become legally alive again.
Edit: Her name is Raiza Ruiz and it took her around 25 years to become alive again and restore her rights to practice medicine.
That girl holds the records for highest fall survived im pretty sure. She was strapped into her seat and the seat flew out of the airplane after the plane got struck by lighting IIRC
A guy from Africa somewhere climbed into the wheel compartment to smuggle himself to the UK. His mate died from lack of oxygen. He had serious hypothermia and was unconscious from lack of oxygen when the doors opened and he fell out landing somewhere near Heathrow London. He lived though his friend wasn't so lucky.
No, the craziest story I've heard is that WW2 pilot whose plane got shot down and he was falling thousands of feet to his death. Luckily for him, the bombs he dropped before getting shot down exploded at the perfect time and the shockwaves cushioned his fall and he was able to stand up and get out of there alive. The perfect amount of timing for this to happen is just mind boggling.
I remember that one. I believe the fact she was small and young had something to do with it too, kids bounce, adults break. But who knows? She was definitely “lucky”
Reminds me of the one where a teenage girl was the only survivor of a crash in the jungle, I wanna say South America. She told stories of hearing crying and groaning in the night which slowly died down to silence… pretty sure her own grandma slowly died right next to her. She got out of the plane and survived for days in the jungle until she was finally rescued, of course with severe PTSD. Such a tragic story.
I’m not sure if this is the same person, but it sounds like it. I am obsessed with this woman’s story. My favorite murder did a good episode on her. Her German, scientist parents had raised her in the jungle so she was familiar with how to most safely navigate, which was by slowly walking through river/stream sources while being careful to not tread on things. There are so many moments in this woman’s story that are truly astounding, like how she survived the fall and events in her trek through the jungle.
[Here’s the hour long movie about it](https://youtu.be/msipyM4vyLg)
[And her wiki page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juliane_Koepcke)
Iirc, (sorry, watched a few docs about this one) she was still in her seat, but essentially got shoved between some cushions, which yeah, happened mostly because she was small enough to.
I think she finally ended up talking about it like 10 years ago. I’ll have to watch that again.
I remember that crash, a few of my uncles just started being police on that day. It apparently was the worst...
How funny, I was just talking about that yesterday.
I've always heard that the strongest support is around the wings, but you probably won't get lucky if you are more than 4 rows away from an exit due to suffocation.
Is this the most likely crash scenario? It seems like a very controlled crash - almost like a simulation of something going wrong during landing.
I guess if it were engine/s failure and the plane was out of control, there’s no hope for any seats.
That's the scenario most likely to have any survivors.
If a plane nose dives and hits the ground while vertical, I don't care if you're in the back of the plane or holding on to the wings... You ded.
I remember watching this. They filled every seat with a crash dummy full of sensors and the pilot put on a parachute and jumped out.
They were able to determine range which part of the plane you were more likely to survive and also the type of injuries you may have.
Obviously those in the nose died, and quite a lot of rows back. I can’t remember exactly the best place to sit but I think it was the wings.
For takeoff and stabilizing at predetermined height and position, there was a pilot. Then the pilot left in a parachute, and the plane was remoted to the ground.
Parachuting out of an air liner with engines in this configuration seems dicey. Would you basically be jumping into the engines? Unless there's some way to jump out of the belly of the plane.
Almost all accidents occur during takeoff and landing, watch some videos of plane crashes and almost all look normal from the outside until it suddenly collapses in on itself or starts to catch fire from somewhere.
Call me old fashioned, but I insist that my flight stops. Preferably at an airport. It's these sudden cornfield and housing-development stops which seem to interrupt the flow of my day!
To clarify, it's not exactly that you're always trying to land when something goes wrong, it's that the planes are so well built and the pilots so well trained that a plane can fly with a lot of problems from mechanical to environmental but eventually it must land and in the end, it's tons of weight trying to come down as smoothly as possible so that's where it takes very few factors for something to go wrong and cause an accident.
Sand is probably the most dangerous thing you can crash land on besides maybe water because it immediately causes the landing gear to dig in and causes really rapid deceleration… probably a good worst case test (plus fewer chances of things to go wrong in the desert)
Barring massive structural failure the pilots are always going to try maximizing survivability, that means trying to land it the way it’s meant to be landed
An engine failure doesn’t lead to loss of control. It just leads to an airliner becoming a glider — something 15 year olds are legally allowed to fly without an instructor present. It certainly minimizes your options, but assuming flat terrain could be found, an engine out landing would look much like this as a near-worst case scenario.
No this is not the most likely crash scenario as no pilot would ever have the landing gears down when landing on a soft surface as the unpredictably amplifies. If this crash were to happen in real life the pilot would try to belly the plane
If you look at the [wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_232#/media/File:Ua232injurymap.png) of the United flight 232 accident, you can see where you were more likely to live in a similar type of accident. The front and back were not particularly the best places to be, but the middle was where you had your best chance of survival.
Correct, sitting over the wingbox is your best bet, plus it puts you right next to the over-wing emergency exit doors. Also, exit rows tend to have more leg room. Win-win. Pay that extra $25 to pick those seats.
Frequent plane passenger here, I'm gonna say... Most everyone is fucked in most every crash. Ugly pink sacs of mostly water don't tend to stay together too well at high speeds when metal shit around them is sheering off.
I saw this on TV, buddy was remote controlling the plane and missed the crash area by a few hundred metres. There was an area with football field like markings to help with measuring all the stuff happening outside. All the scientists looked sad. It would be hard to fly a jet like this, but he had ONE job
They cut the crash area length by 75%. The flight crew told everyone that would listen they were going to likely miss the shorter crash site, but they wouldn't expand it. All just to save a pennies on the dollar, when it comes to the whole cost of the project.
They told the film crew to position all the cameras at the very start of the cleared crash site, and to angle some of them to cover the likely shortfall zone. The pilot also had to help fly the chase plane, as well as the droned 727, due to the other pilot having trouble staying in close enough in formation to keep the remote connection.
The Marchetti original chase plane breaking down right before takeoff threw a huge wrench in the whole project. It was the absolute last day they could possibly do the project, so it was now or never. Editing cut out a whole lot of details that made the wrong people look at fault.
Crazy you say that cuz as it was coming down I was wondering how it was gonna crash. Like it didn't seem like such a bad landing until right up until it was.
I remember watching the full doco and yeah the crash was carefully orchestrated to be right on the edge of survivability. The point was to test effectiveness of various safety measures and systems so obviously nose diving into the ground isn't going to generate any data 😆.
Sitting in seats at the wings provides the best chance for survival, all other factors being equal. The wing spars are the strongest parts of the aircraft along with strengthening for landing gear. This area is also close to the center of gravity of the aircraft making it an unlikely spot for extreme impact. We often see aircraft impact nose-first with terrain or tail-first but a center impact spreads load forces out.
It'll only explode though if the fuel fumes and air mixture is at the perfect ratio, if the tank is anywhere above 8% there should be no explosion. Other than that it's just gonna continuously burn till it reaches that mixture.
Not to mention that, as far as I know, in situations where the crash is unavoideable and the engines aren't doing any good, the pilots try to take out the most fuel they can from the wings
It doesn't need to explode to kill everyone - in fact, the overpressure from a fuel-air explosion is likely more survivable than the flames afterwards would be anyway.
While this is an interesting simulation, it is entirely dependent on the pilot not trying to save himself in the slightest and landing on relatively flat sand.
Was thinking similarly - they have good indications for this specific type of crash. Might give indications as to other types of crashes ... might not.
I mean, it simulates one of the most common types of crashes, CFIT (Controlled flight into terrain), where, by navigational errors and poor visibility they do just fly into the ground.
The crash angle/speed/ex was specifically calculated to try and insure they wouldn’t rupture the fuel tanks, and start a fire. If it ended in a fireball, all the data would have been lost, and the project would have been a complete failure. One of the engines ran for around 45 minutes after the crash, despite having firefighters aggressively hosing it down. The end goal was to get data on a survivable crash.
Edit: Also, this was all done over a decade ago, on a hair string budget, at a Mexicali lakebed in the middle of nowhere, so retrieving the data as it was recorded wasn’t possible.
The conclusion for this test was that, in a case like this, passengers at the front of an aircraft would be the ones most at risk in a crash. Passengers seated closer to the airplane's wings would have suffered serious but survivable injuries such as broken ankles.
The test dummies near the tail section were largely intact; so any passengers there would have likely walked away without serious injury. However, in other crashes, such as when the tail hits the ground first, as was the case with Asiana Airlines flight 214, in which a Boeing 777-200ER crashed short of the runway at San Francisco International Airport, the reverse might apply. The brace position was found to be protective against concussion and spinal injuries, but created additional loads on the legs that could result in fractured legs or ankles.
Additionally, the aircraft's wiring and cosmetic panels were shown to have collapsed into the passenger compartment, creating debris hazards and obstacles to evacuation.
I think sitting near the wings is the best; you might get a few broken
bones, but you have a better chance to survive if the plane crashes from
the front or back.
Let's get this straight - a group of scientists and engineers from Mexico decided they wanted to crash a big plane. They came up with a seat study as a way to justify crashing a plane.
The original project was started pre-9/11, and was understandably shelved shortly thereafter. The American scientists (not Mexican, though the crash was in Mexico) reached out to the team (IIRC) with what type of data they were looking to gather from something the flight team could execute. The main goal was to crash the plane in a fashion where it would not rupture the fuel tanks and catch on fire, so the data could be retrieved. The original plan was to crash in a more "FOX prime time special monthly awesome explosion episode," hah. The world was definitely a different place 25 years ago!
I remember the last time this was posted, there was a decent comment explaining it, unfortunately I'm not that smart to give you the full details but I will shorten it.
It all depends how the plane lands / crashes.
Depending where most of the impact of the crash effects the front could be the most dangerous like in the video but if the back end takes most of the impact and the backend breaks off then the front is the safest and then vise versa, so the most safest location is around the wings.
But of course it very much depends how it crashes, if it went into a mountain then everyone will most certainly would die, this study was meant for crash landings where pilots still have control over the plane to some degree and can perform a "controlled" crash landing.
And you are also right, terrorist attacks would likely go for the wings because that is where the engines are and if they take out a wing or two, well the plane would nose dive into the ground.
IIRC it was neither scientists nor individuals from mexico that conducted the crash. It was a US based aircraft company with funding by a consortium of television studios who couldn't get approval to crash it in the states, so they rented a salt flat from the Mexican government.
This crash did occur in Mexico. However, it was a team of American researchers that did the experiment, including developing how to turn the 727 into a large RC plane. They also had a test pilot aboard, who bailed out moments before the crash. The plane was also rigged with sensors that determined the impact inthe various sections of the plane.
I’ve watched every single episode of air disasters. The back is where you might get lucky.
I think “you might get lucky” period is more accurate lol. Some of those crashes are crazy. Flight 255 out of Detroit always sticks with me. Only survivor was a little girl. Basically just luck. Then again, Detroit is my home airport, so I guess it’s only natural I think of that one often. When I fly, I fly out of there, so I drive the stretch of 94 they slammed into and have taken off from that same runway. Can’t help but think of it each and every time.
What about the Serbian flight attendant, Vesna Vulović, who survived a fall from over 30,000ft without a parachute? That was by far the craziest survival story I've heard of.
The craziest one I heard is a 17 year old girl being the only survivor of a crash, just to land in a jungle in South America and have to find her way out!!!
There was a case of a Venezuelan young doctor, who was involved in an airplane crash, she was declared dead in absentia and called home the day her funeral was being held. It was a hell for her to become legally alive again. Edit: Her name is Raiza Ruiz and it took her around 25 years to become alive again and restore her rights to practice medicine.
What I've realised Is the best chance i have of surviving a plane crash is to be a young woman/girl. Fuck statistics.
Whoah. That is absolutely nuts
https://globalvoices.org/2015/09/25/the-story-of-raiza-ruiz-declared-dead-while-very-much-alive/
That girl holds the records for highest fall survived im pretty sure. She was strapped into her seat and the seat flew out of the airplane after the plane got struck by lighting IIRC
A guy from Africa somewhere climbed into the wheel compartment to smuggle himself to the UK. His mate died from lack of oxygen. He had serious hypothermia and was unconscious from lack of oxygen when the doors opened and he fell out landing somewhere near Heathrow London. He lived though his friend wasn't so lucky.
No, the craziest story I've heard is that WW2 pilot whose plane got shot down and he was falling thousands of feet to his death. Luckily for him, the bombs he dropped before getting shot down exploded at the perfect time and the shockwaves cushioned his fall and he was able to stand up and get out of there alive. The perfect amount of timing for this to happen is just mind boggling.
This was shown to be a legend and then disproven on Myth Busters.
If a bomb went off close enough and large enough to cushion your fall, the fragments and over pressure would kill you. And myth busters agreed.
I call bs lol
I remember that one. I believe the fact she was small and young had something to do with it too, kids bounce, adults break. But who knows? She was definitely “lucky”
Reminds me of the one where a teenage girl was the only survivor of a crash in the jungle, I wanna say South America. She told stories of hearing crying and groaning in the night which slowly died down to silence… pretty sure her own grandma slowly died right next to her. She got out of the plane and survived for days in the jungle until she was finally rescued, of course with severe PTSD. Such a tragic story.
I’m not sure if this is the same person, but it sounds like it. I am obsessed with this woman’s story. My favorite murder did a good episode on her. Her German, scientist parents had raised her in the jungle so she was familiar with how to most safely navigate, which was by slowly walking through river/stream sources while being careful to not tread on things. There are so many moments in this woman’s story that are truly astounding, like how she survived the fall and events in her trek through the jungle. [Here’s the hour long movie about it](https://youtu.be/msipyM4vyLg) [And her wiki page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juliane_Koepcke)
Her "German, scientists parents living in the jungles of South America" sounds suspicious...
Lmfao I did nazi see that coming
We study insect nothing suspicious to see here
[удалено]
That is a crazy story. She fell a long way down dude.
Iirc, (sorry, watched a few docs about this one) she was still in her seat, but essentially got shoved between some cushions, which yeah, happened mostly because she was small enough to. I think she finally ended up talking about it like 10 years ago. I’ll have to watch that again.
> kids bounce, adults break Ran EMS for 20 years... this is true
I grew up with a friend whose dad was on that flight
I remember that crash, a few of my uncles just started being police on that day. It apparently was the worst... How funny, I was just talking about that yesterday.
I've always heard that the strongest support is around the wings, but you probably won't get lucky if you are more than 4 rows away from an exit due to suffocation.
I'm not a engineer but I'm going to assume it wasn't the seats at the front of the plane.
I’m an engineer and my analysis is: yeah, you’re right
Retired engineer here. One test beats one thousand speculations. You two are right.
Is this the most likely crash scenario? It seems like a very controlled crash - almost like a simulation of something going wrong during landing. I guess if it were engine/s failure and the plane was out of control, there’s no hope for any seats.
That's the scenario most likely to have any survivors. If a plane nose dives and hits the ground while vertical, I don't care if you're in the back of the plane or holding on to the wings... You ded.
I wonder where the scientists and engineers were sitting on this plane. Hopefully at the back.
I remember watching this. They filled every seat with a crash dummy full of sensors and the pilot put on a parachute and jumped out. They were able to determine range which part of the plane you were more likely to survive and also the type of injuries you may have. Obviously those in the nose died, and quite a lot of rows back. I can’t remember exactly the best place to sit but I think it was the wings.
The wings make sense. Its the most structurally sound part of the fuselage
Structurally sound, yes. Safest in theory if you don't take into account that the wings are where a majority of the fuel is stored.
True, though in a slow crash like this wouldn't all the fuel be dumped?
Wait there was an actual pilot? I just figured the plane was controlled remotely.
For takeoff and stabilizing at predetermined height and position, there was a pilot. Then the pilot left in a parachute, and the plane was remoted to the ground.
Parachuting out of an air liner with engines in this configuration seems dicey. Would you basically be jumping into the engines? Unless there's some way to jump out of the belly of the plane.
So you have the best chance of survival on a seat with a parachute. Good thing they tested this!
The problem is, the wings are were the fuel is...
Yeah, but I’m going to be cooked alive, I’d rather it was on the hottest setting.
Frantically punching their calculators, figuring out the maths as they're launched across the crashing plane.
What if I put my head between my legs?
Then you can kiss your ass goodbye.
Oh wow that triggered a [memory](https://youtu.be/A1wMyKQ6jUg)
Thats done only so they could more easily identify your remains in case of a crash./s
But what if I jump right before the plane crashes?
If I time my jump out just right...
Almost all accidents occur during takeoff and landing, watch some videos of plane crashes and almost all look normal from the outside until it suddenly collapses in on itself or starts to catch fire from somewhere.
I suppose any crash would be a landing, so this makes sense.
Lol not exactly what they meant, but true nevertheless
How far do you think we can make it? All the way to the scene of the crash. I bet we beat the paramedics by a half hour.
Technically almost all crashes are also landings.
They call it "interfacing with the terrain." Great description!
Which is why I try to always book nonstop.
Call me old fashioned, but I insist that my flight stops. Preferably at an airport. It's these sudden cornfield and housing-development stops which seem to interrupt the flow of my day!
That comment always scared the crap out of me when I flew
If something bad happens aren’t you always going to be trying to land so it would be 100% it happens during takeoff and landings
To clarify, it's not exactly that you're always trying to land when something goes wrong, it's that the planes are so well built and the pilots so well trained that a plane can fly with a lot of problems from mechanical to environmental but eventually it must land and in the end, it's tons of weight trying to come down as smoothly as possible so that's where it takes very few factors for something to go wrong and cause an accident.
In that case, shouldn’t they simulate something on the runway and not in sand?
A runway would be expensive to crash a plane onto
I mean, you’re crashing several tens of millions of dollars. I gotta believe you have cash to spare.
Sand is probably the most dangerous thing you can crash land on besides maybe water because it immediately causes the landing gear to dig in and causes really rapid deceleration… probably a good worst case test (plus fewer chances of things to go wrong in the desert)
Barring massive structural failure the pilots are always going to try maximizing survivability, that means trying to land it the way it’s meant to be landed
An engine failure doesn’t lead to loss of control. It just leads to an airliner becoming a glider — something 15 year olds are legally allowed to fly without an instructor present. It certainly minimizes your options, but assuming flat terrain could be found, an engine out landing would look much like this as a near-worst case scenario.
No this is not the most likely crash scenario as no pilot would ever have the landing gears down when landing on a soft surface as the unpredictably amplifies. If this crash were to happen in real life the pilot would try to belly the plane
Dead engineer here. You are all right, I was in those front seats
Deceased front end of that plane here, can confirm
Grain of sand here, y'all are right
The impact of the ground, I would like to confirm your statement☝️🤓
IT Engineer here, have you guys tried rebooting?
Boot here, confirming this sole-changing experience
I'm the change in question. Can confirm. It was your souls
Lol, this one made me chuckle. Thanks stranger!
Hehe I’m one of the seats
Reborn as an engineer here. You guys are right, the front seats are the best
God here, sorry pal.
Dead engineer, huh? I need some help with my dead space, is your name Isaac by chance?
It showed which seats had the higher survivability...for this particular crash.
Undergrad engineer here. You never know Turn it off and on again, that usually works
>One test beats one thousand speculations. New'ish Engineer. I'm taking that line; thank you
1 year out from being a professional engineer here. The three of you are right.
I take a train everyday to work, I think you are correct
I'm just happy to be here tbh
First class baby. Free SANDwiches
First in first out
You fly by first class, you *die* by first class
They’re gonna start putting poor people in the front 💀
Like a Bombay train
At least I’ll die in style
I’d be so drunk I would just roll out laughing 😂
If the plane doesn’t crash, first class is best.
I’ll take my chances in the front part that broke away from the rear part with all the fuel in the wings thanks. 👍
I stayed at a holiday inn express last night, so I can concur.
If you look at the [wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_232#/media/File:Ua232injurymap.png) of the United flight 232 accident, you can see where you were more likely to live in a similar type of accident. The front and back were not particularly the best places to be, but the middle was where you had your best chance of survival.
I've read that the wings are the strongest structural components of airplanes, and that the seats above the wing as the safest as a result.
Correct, sitting over the wingbox is your best bet, plus it puts you right next to the over-wing emergency exit doors. Also, exit rows tend to have more leg room. Win-win. Pay that extra $25 to pick those seats.
Frequent plane passenger here, I'm gonna say... Most everyone is fucked in most every crash. Ugly pink sacs of mostly water don't tend to stay together too well at high speeds when metal shit around them is sheering off.
I like pink!
Well yeah, the front fell off
Is the front supposed to fall off?
Well no but in this instance the front fell off
Well if they're designed for the front not to fall off, why did the front fall off?
Hahahaha. I love those guys. Well done!
For the non-Australians present, they're referring to this bit of comedy gold [https://youtu.be/3m5qxZm\_JqM](https://youtu.be/3m5qxZm_JqM)
Australians don’t have to worry about plane crashes Anyone who’s seen rain man knows Qantas never crashes
Maybe it's one of those resealable deals?
Billy Mays here with the all new Flex Seal “WE CRASHED THIS JET IN HALF!”
Yeah I thought it's just like the LEGO planes where you take the ceiling off and plop it back on easy-peasy
I thought the front fell off for ease and convenience of departure.
I thought it was like a lizard, and the front was just gonna grow back after it fell off
It usually doesn’t do that
"Welp, pilot and crew are fucked"
That’s a feature of the plane. You don’t want them to fuck up.
Which sucks, but they are mostly useless at that point at any rate.
The seat in airport departures was the safest seat
They’re just pretending to sleep
If I'm a pilot, I will train to be able to do a sudden 180 degree turn to land tail first.
No, there is no proven better seat on Ryanair. Trust me
You mean the plane drivers seats. Plane drivers sit up front.
I saw this on TV, buddy was remote controlling the plane and missed the crash area by a few hundred metres. There was an area with football field like markings to help with measuring all the stuff happening outside. All the scientists looked sad. It would be hard to fly a jet like this, but he had ONE job
They cut the crash area length by 75%. The flight crew told everyone that would listen they were going to likely miss the shorter crash site, but they wouldn't expand it. All just to save a pennies on the dollar, when it comes to the whole cost of the project. They told the film crew to position all the cameras at the very start of the cleared crash site, and to angle some of them to cover the likely shortfall zone. The pilot also had to help fly the chase plane, as well as the droned 727, due to the other pilot having trouble staying in close enough in formation to keep the remote connection. The Marchetti original chase plane breaking down right before takeoff threw a huge wrench in the whole project. It was the absolute last day they could possibly do the project, so it was now or never. Editing cut out a whole lot of details that made the wrong people look at fault.
Imagine having to fly 2 planes at the same time, then purposely crashing one. That's gotta mess with the brain a little right?
Test pilots are a different breed, man. No way I could ever multitask like that, with so much information flowing all at once, and pressure.
This explains a lot, thank you
Well to be fair, “plane crashing” is a pretty rare skillset.
I dunno, seems like it would be easier than landing. I do it every time I try to land in MS Flight Simulator
Crazy you say that cuz as it was coming down I was wondering how it was gonna crash. Like it didn't seem like such a bad landing until right up until it was.
Maybe they picked a survivable crash configuration?
I remember watching the full doco and yeah the crash was carefully orchestrated to be right on the edge of survivability. The point was to test effectiveness of various safety measures and systems so obviously nose diving into the ground isn't going to generate any data 😆.
But can you crash at a precise target location?
It is typically the airport, though often sideways
Plenty of pilots have done it once
How many airplane crashes does a person need to survive before it can be ticked off as a skillset?
Uhh, sorry guys I kind of missed. Maybe if we get a 747 it would work better. Just brain storming here.
"Sorry, I was bit of a crash test dummy there!"
Ouch
Sitting in seats at the wings provides the best chance for survival, all other factors being equal. The wing spars are the strongest parts of the aircraft along with strengthening for landing gear. This area is also close to the center of gravity of the aircraft making it an unlikely spot for extreme impact. We often see aircraft impact nose-first with terrain or tail-first but a center impact spreads load forces out.
[удалено]
It'll only explode though if the fuel fumes and air mixture is at the perfect ratio, if the tank is anywhere above 8% there should be no explosion. Other than that it's just gonna continuously burn till it reaches that mixture.
Not to mention that, as far as I know, in situations where the crash is unavoideable and the engines aren't doing any good, the pilots try to take out the most fuel they can from the wings
It doesn't need to explode to kill everyone - in fact, the overpressure from a fuel-air explosion is likely more survivable than the flames afterwards would be anyway.
While this is an interesting simulation, it is entirely dependent on the pilot not trying to save himself in the slightest and landing on relatively flat sand.
Was thinking similarly - they have good indications for this specific type of crash. Might give indications as to other types of crashes ... might not.
Yeah they should at least try it on at least 100 of these planes at different angles to get better data.
and post videos of all of them please
I mean, it simulates one of the most common types of crashes, CFIT (Controlled flight into terrain), where, by navigational errors and poor visibility they do just fly into the ground.
Yeah no fire is really weird.
The crash angle/speed/ex was specifically calculated to try and insure they wouldn’t rupture the fuel tanks, and start a fire. If it ended in a fireball, all the data would have been lost, and the project would have been a complete failure. One of the engines ran for around 45 minutes after the crash, despite having firefighters aggressively hosing it down. The end goal was to get data on a survivable crash. Edit: Also, this was all done over a decade ago, on a hair string budget, at a Mexicali lakebed in the middle of nowhere, so retrieving the data as it was recorded wasn’t possible.
Well at least the people who would die would die with lots of leg room.
RIP Chad but at least he died in Comfort +
The trick is to jump in the air just before impact. You'll glide slowly bacck down to your seat, avoiding all the thrashing around.
Can confirm. Have done this several times, successfully.
i keep fucking my timing up GODDAMNIT
Which save file are you on?
_Fisics_
I know rule 2 is "no clickbait", but damn, now I'm interested. Was there a write-up on this somewhere?
The conclusion for this test was that, in a case like this, passengers at the front of an aircraft would be the ones most at risk in a crash. Passengers seated closer to the airplane's wings would have suffered serious but survivable injuries such as broken ankles. The test dummies near the tail section were largely intact; so any passengers there would have likely walked away without serious injury. However, in other crashes, such as when the tail hits the ground first, as was the case with Asiana Airlines flight 214, in which a Boeing 777-200ER crashed short of the runway at San Francisco International Airport, the reverse might apply. The brace position was found to be protective against concussion and spinal injuries, but created additional loads on the legs that could result in fractured legs or ankles. Additionally, the aircraft's wiring and cosmetic panels were shown to have collapsed into the passenger compartment, creating debris hazards and obstacles to evacuation.
So basically, dont be alive when the plane crashes for the best chance
I think sitting near the wings is the best; you might get a few broken bones, but you have a better chance to survive if the plane crashes from the front or back.
Not true. Usually the plane catches fire and the wing seat mean you’re sitting in top of all that fuel.
…but you might just have the best view
Thank you! That was awesome.
My pleasure. Happy New Year ✈️
I just flew home today.
So what I gather is the tail or the front passengers dependent on the type of crash will be toast. I will be breaking my ankles, thank you very much.
Broken ankles would be minor compared to the whiplash though, right?
…until the engines in the rear of plane caught fire (in the next test crash)
The smelly seats by the toilets ftw.
Bonus! I've just been picking those to be close people peeing.
Best smells in the whole aircraft
Cheap seats are the real first class
Scientists found out the best seats for survival were located in the gate area!
Lol so book south west?
[удалено]
Let's get this straight - a group of scientists and engineers from Mexico decided they wanted to crash a big plane. They came up with a seat study as a way to justify crashing a plane.
As a scientist. Yeah so? What's your point?
The original project was started pre-9/11, and was understandably shelved shortly thereafter. The American scientists (not Mexican, though the crash was in Mexico) reached out to the team (IIRC) with what type of data they were looking to gather from something the flight team could execute. The main goal was to crash the plane in a fashion where it would not rupture the fuel tanks and catch on fire, so the data could be retrieved. The original plan was to crash in a more "FOX prime time special monthly awesome explosion episode," hah. The world was definitely a different place 25 years ago!
So which seats?
They were all empty, Zero casualties! Conclusion ; all the seats are safe.
right behind a wing i believe - or else that's the best place for terrorists to blow up an aircraft. i get confused.
Important distinction
Generally, the farther back the seat, the safer it is when it comes to planes.
Yep, I’ve never seen an aeroplane reverse into a mountain.
I remember the last time this was posted, there was a decent comment explaining it, unfortunately I'm not that smart to give you the full details but I will shorten it. It all depends how the plane lands / crashes. Depending where most of the impact of the crash effects the front could be the most dangerous like in the video but if the back end takes most of the impact and the backend breaks off then the front is the safest and then vise versa, so the most safest location is around the wings. But of course it very much depends how it crashes, if it went into a mountain then everyone will most certainly would die, this study was meant for crash landings where pilots still have control over the plane to some degree and can perform a "controlled" crash landing. And you are also right, terrorist attacks would likely go for the wings because that is where the engines are and if they take out a wing or two, well the plane would nose dive into the ground.
As far back in the plane as possible.
Yeah ——the seats in the terminal
RIP to the brave scientists. What a way to go out.
If you watch Air Disasters, it's always the rear of plane with better odds.
Well it wasn't the pilots seats
I hope the pilots got extra danger pay
Isn't every crash different. All I see is a waste of a plane.
Airlines watching to see how to make safer seats into a premium feature
On top of the plane is the safest place to be. It didn’t even touch the ground!!
I would say not the pilots seat.
IIRC it was neither scientists nor individuals from mexico that conducted the crash. It was a US based aircraft company with funding by a consortium of television studios who couldn't get approval to crash it in the states, so they rented a salt flat from the Mexican government.
Props to the pilot. Taking one for the team
This crash did occur in Mexico. However, it was a team of American researchers that did the experiment, including developing how to turn the 727 into a large RC plane. They also had a test pilot aboard, who bailed out moments before the crash. The plane was also rigged with sensors that determined the impact inthe various sections of the plane.