We also host the AskNik site,just click on the Sierra

Please if you find this site helpful & wish to help with it's funding. Thank You.


Author Topic: No more flying  (Read 4414 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Janspeedcapri

  • Guest
No more flying
« on: August 21, 2008, 00:46:25 AM »
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4576835.ece]http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle4576835.ece

I have always been afraid of flying. Its not a phobia - a phobia is defined as am irrational fear but i think its completely rational to be afraid of flying.
During my 20s I forced myself to ignore the alarm bells that rang in my head at the prospect of boarding a plane and went on a few holidays with my bird.
I nearly shat myself on every take off because the worst thing is engine failure during the early stages of take off - I even cried once on a flight to Norway.
despite it all weve also flown to Italy, Portugal, Turkey, and New Zealand with stop offs in Koreas and Fiji over the years but my bird is my wife now, and the mother of my 3 kids, with another due in november and you know what..while i make the decisions, we ain't goin on any planes.  

My kids can make their own decision about taking the risk when they are adults...but till then, if we can't go by sea or rail or car, then we ain't goin - simple. I know those 3 are probably more likely to result in an accident STATISTICALY but theres a major difference - I'm in control of more of variables that affect that likelhood. Also, I think that the VAST majority of accidents involved in land travel are surviveable compared to a plane going down.
I can't imagine anything worse than knowing for even a minute that my family and me are about to die an awful death, while sitting in a comfy seat waiting for the impact...powerless to do anything except scream. On land, in an aquaplaning car or at sea on a sinking ship you could fight for survival till either help came or you die - but at least you die fighting - trying to correct the slide  and regain grip or finding a float/boyany aid. To have to just sit there, with 150 other people screamin - no way - however unlikely the chance, i can't take it with my wife and daughters.



IansSaph

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #1 on: August 21, 2008, 09:24:26 AM »
My mate has removed his Wireless internet and cordless phone from his house, he is convinced the true power of short wave high frequency radio waves has on skin cells, he is convinced its the cause of the majority of cancer these days, Hes not a weirdo or stupid either....

I think we take a lot for granted and take risks with out really considering the concequences or possible outcomes.

Janspeedcapri

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #2 on: August 21, 2008, 10:50:37 AM »
Quote from: IansSaph
I think we take a lot for granted and take risks with out really considering the concequences or possible outcomes.

Big business is always behind it - look at the tobacco industry - at this stage we KNOW its harmful and potentialy fatal to smoke but we are STILL alowed to do it. I know they no longer actively encourage but I think thats because they realise nicotine is physicaly addictive and even though we know its bad - we can't help ourselves and the warnings on packs free them of any responsability yet they still collect the cash. When i say "they" I mean the tobacco industry and politicians as a single beneficiary - after all the gov takes the most money and then the politicians end up in the tobacco trade after their political carrers are over - Kenneth Clarke is on the the board of directors of British American Tobacco ya know.

The health and safety of the population is not a factor in businesses or goverments decisions - liability might be - but as long as the individuals in power benefit and don't get blamed for the outcome...game on.

YOU have to be your own risk assesor - DON'T think "its legal/popular/advertised SO it must be safe/good for you/a good thing" thats bollocks. The people who SHOULD be warning us of the dangers of the products and services we buy are placed in their role and rewarded NOT TO.

And the reverse is also true - when the gov says somethings bad...it may just be bad business for them and their corporate allies  

bortaf

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #3 on: August 21, 2008, 14:14:01 PM »
It's still safer to fly than cross the road, if you aint scared to cross the road but are to fly, that's a phobia, no matter how you try to rationalise it  

This is coming from a 6Ft 4 18 stione lump who runs and screams at the sight of a spider  

samol

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #4 on: August 21, 2008, 14:43:11 PM »
Interesting fact, from 39000 feet it takes approximately seventeen minutes for an airliner to fall all the way, time for you to make a few phone calls, :-)
     And knowing this I still fly, it's the only way to get anywhere far away, fly to Aus 22 hrs, go by boat about three weeks, and longer. Ray
« Last Edit: August 21, 2008, 14:45:37 PM by samol »

Janspeedcapri

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #5 on: August 21, 2008, 18:23:41 PM »
Quote from: bortaf
It's still safer to fly than cross the road

Crossing the road is unavoidable, and I alone control the risks associated (i know me greencross code  ) - I need to do it on a regular basis - flying i can do without - my livelyhood doesn't depend on it and tbh, i can put the money to far better uses than going on some transient, trivial wildgoose chase to a tourist hellhole only to rooked at every turn by foreigners who quite honestly, anoy me. There are thousands of lovely places to go for a trip or hioliday by road or rail or see - but i'm lucky...I live in the 7th most popular tourist destination...the U of K

Offline mouldytbags

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 296
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • http://
No more flying
« Reply #6 on: August 21, 2008, 19:08:00 PM »
i hate flying with a passion.been to many a country with the army,canada,belize,kuwait,iraq,qutar,germany,kenya,etc.
worst flight ive ever had was over iraq in a hercules with body armour and helmet on.these aircraft can do some seriouse manouvering.makes it even worse when the lights are off and in total darkness and you can hear every part of the aircraft moving and creaking.scary sh*t!!

Janspeedcapri

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #7 on: August 21, 2008, 19:31:43 PM »
Good on ya mouldybags - you did it never the less - did your duty. Obviously, if i was called up cos russia started a big war with europe  - i'd be prepared to go in a plane, cos in the context of the whole thing, flying is the least of ya worries, i would imagine (you would know)  
I'm suddenly rteminded of that line b.a had in the ateam -  "I ain't gettin on no plane, fool!" ...that will be the answer my wife gets when she next suggests a cheapo package nightmare to poxy portugal or terrible turkey  

Offline capri v8 driver

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6782
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • http://
No more flying
« Reply #8 on: August 21, 2008, 19:44:55 PM »
i feel sorry for the people that where in that plain and there family and my hart goes out for them.

but in life, in everything you do, there is always risk off dying. if it is flying, driving, walking up the stairs, smoking a sigaret or inhale the air next to the motorway or fabrick, sports and you name it. but if i have to do everting save, i beter stay inside the house, in my room, in my chair. i don't think i have a life left.

let me live, even if it kills me.

greetz paul.

capri v8 driver.
greetz Paul.

Capri V8 Driver.

Offline mouldytbags

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 296
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • http://
No more flying
« Reply #9 on: August 21, 2008, 19:46:04 PM »
russia wont start a war im sure of it,there army is shite.they provide lots of gas and oil tho...............
we all die,just a matter of when and how.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2008, 19:46:45 PM by mouldytbags »

Janspeedcapri

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #10 on: August 21, 2008, 20:00:54 PM »
Quote from: mouldytbags
we all die,just a matter of when and how.
Exactly - I'd rather it not be terrifying,  painful, untimely and accompanied by the death of my loved ones.

I'd like to die when Ive honestly had enough of life and when lifes had enough of me - when my kids have their own families. I'd like to die in my sleep, in my bed, after a nice dinner and a good shag  


I was watching armeggedon the other night - and i wouldn't mind if i had to die to save the world or my family - although i'd rather not if at all possible.

I like wot paul said tho - let me live, even if it kills me - I agree but the risk of such a horrible end is just not justified by the supposed pleasure of 2 weeks in benidorm. I drive fast, which is a risk I am prepared to take because it gives me grewat pleasure almost everyday, and the risk can be limited by me - in a plane at 30,000 ft, it cannot. My life is in the hands of the airlines accountants - not even their pilots.

bortaf

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #11 on: August 25, 2008, 15:06:03 PM »
Quote from: samol
Interesting fact, from 39000 feet it takes approximately seventeen minutes for an airliner to fall all the way, time for you to make a few phone calls, :-)
     And knowing this I still fly, it's the only way to get anywhere far away, fly to Aus 22 hrs, go by boat about three weeks, and longer. Ray

17 mins? you sure  
whats the terminal velocity of an airlinner then? a humans is roughly 90M per second that 297 feet per second so for 39000 feet it would take about  131 seconds or just over 2 mins to fall that far, if the plane is gliding it aint falling and it would have to glide to take 17 mins to fall  

sorry spent WAY too long investigating UFOs and stuff and to think i got into cars to get a life
« Last Edit: August 25, 2008, 15:11:01 PM by bortaf »

samol

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #12 on: August 25, 2008, 23:27:34 PM »
[quote name='bortaf' date='Aug 25 2008, 03:06 PM' post='38906']
17 mins? you sure  
whats the terminal velocity of an airlinner then? a humans is roughly 90M per second that 297 feet per second so for 39000 feet it would take about  131 seconds or just over 2 mins to fall that far, if the plane is gliding it aint falling and it would have to glide to take 17 mins to fall  

Quote

Ah! but what you have to take into acount is that an aircraft has huge wind resistance, plus if you had a total failure, (wings fell of), the fusalage is still doing 500 + MPH, so you need to calculate a parabolic curve taking it,s foreward speed into account,(deminishing due to friction of the air), plus the velocity of a falling body, (32 feet per second, per second, ie 32' 1st second, 64' 2nd, 96' 3rd, and so on, to a terminal velocity of (i think) 120 mph. Now if you work all that out 17 min's is the answer from 39K feet.     Ray

JohnLawley

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2008, 11:01:11 AM »
i'm pretty sure planes are a dam site more aerodynamic then human bodies, they also don't glide for longer then about 20 secs before they slow down so much they drop like a stone.

bortaf

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #14 on: August 28, 2008, 13:18:24 PM »
If an aircraft had huge wind resistance it wouldn't fly!
your thinking of a parachute  

Janspeedcapri

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2008, 15:13:47 PM »
Quote from: bortaf
If an aircraft had huge wind resistance it wouldn't fly!

planes are aerodynamic - they are designed to resist airflow (forget wind) in order to acheive lift, but at the same time cut through it to acheive thrust...depending on the planes orientation which SHOULD be controlled by the pilot/autopilot... SO your all wrong and partialy correct...but mainly wrong  

747 and the like are designed to nosedive in the event of power loss - this is because the designers know that the most likely cause of power loss is stalled engines and nosediving will "bumpstart" them. However, if the engine failure is due to bird strike or engine fire, the plane will nosedive all the way to the ground at a fair steep angle. If the plane has broken up,(loseing a wing perhaps) its random and the plane could well drop like a stone OR spiral like a sycamore seedpod. Either way, its fine - as I will NOT be on it  

samol

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #16 on: August 28, 2008, 22:57:40 PM »
Quote from: bortaf
If an aircraft had huge wind resistance it wouldn't fly!
your thinking of a parachute  

No mate I am thinking of an aircraft, the wind resistance bit comes in when it , for whatever reason, dosen't/cant fly in a foreward direction, "ie" straight down.
There are two recorded cases of large, "ie" 747type, aircraft taking between twelve and seventeen minutes to fall out of the sky. One was the Locaby disaster, 12 mins, and the other was one shot down, cant remember by who, that took 17 mins. So not my figures, but those recorded on the flight recorder. Morbid subject ain't it. Cheers Ray

Offline mouldytbags

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 296
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • http://
No more flying
« Reply #17 on: August 29, 2008, 19:05:37 PM »
Quote from: samol
No mate I am thinking of an aircraft, the wind resistance bit comes in when it , for whatever reason, dosen't/cant fly in a foreward direction, "ie" straight down.
There are two recorded cases of large, "ie" 747type, aircraft taking between twelve and seventeen minutes to fall out of the sky. One was the Locaby disaster, 12 mins, and the other was one shot down, cant remember by who, that took 17 mins. So not my figures, but those recorded on the flight recorder. Morbid subject ain't it. Cheers Ray

on the subject of morbid,have you seen the vid on utube of the sierra crashing at 90mph and taking the drivers head of with the steering wheel?more conserned about crahing my 4i now than flying

JohnLawley

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #18 on: September 05, 2008, 03:18:53 AM »
Quote from: bortaf
If an aircraft had huge wind resistance it wouldn't fly!
your thinking of a parachute  

they do have huge wind resistence thats why there engine make 10,000;bs+ of thrust....

and they have 2-4 of them.....

just reading about air disasters on wikipedia:-

Quote
18:38 GMT – KAL 007 disappeared from the radar screen (approximately 12 minutes after the initial attack)[34].. Soviet radar personnel stationed at Komsomolsk-na-Amura on the Siberian maritime reported KAL 007 disappearing from radar screen at 18:38 at 1,000 ft (300 m) altitude due to radar inability to track below that altitude. A free fall from 35,000 feet (11,000 m) would take a similar aircraft approximately 2 minutes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Flight_007]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Flight_007 talking about a 747.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2008, 04:21:27 AM by JohnLawley »

popuptoaster

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #19 on: September 05, 2008, 10:16:50 AM »
Its definately irrational to be afraid of engine failiure in a plane, gas turbine engines are the most reliable form of combustion engine we can build, not only that but they are all fed from individual tanks, have independant electrics and electronics and independant safety systems so even in the event of a failiure the chances of all of em shutting down are miniscule.

I dont understand how someonecan trust a home built, unchecked car built on a budget with second hand parts and and unverifiable history at 70mph plus and yet be afraid of a plane that is looked after by an army of mechanics were they change things on an hours used basis rather than waiting for stuff to just fail?

IansSaph

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #20 on: September 05, 2008, 10:30:44 AM »
Quote from: popuptoaster

I dont understand how someonecan trust a home built, unchecked car built on a budget with second hand parts and and unverifiable history at 70mph plus and yet be afraid of a plane that is looked after by an army of mechanics were they change things on an hours used basis rather than waiting for stuff to just fail?

i actually quite like that reasoning.  

Janspeedcapri

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #21 on: September 05, 2008, 19:21:01 PM »
Quote from: popuptoaster
I dont understand how someonecan trust a home built, unchecked car built on a budget with second hand parts and and unverifiable history at 70mph plus and yet be afraid of a plane that is looked after by an army of mechanics were they change things on an hours used basis rather than waiting for stuff to just fail?

unchecked? s/h parts? unverifiable history? dunno who ya talkin about but that AIN'T me. I double check everything and only use new moving/critical parts. and ive had my car stripped to a bare metal shell so i know for a fact its not been written off or anything. BESIDES I never attempt to fly in it! an engine failure as i attempt to take off from from homebase carpark isn't nearly as life threatening  

AND if the safety measures are so great on planes, why do they crash at all? What did the army of mechanics forget to do the other week in spain??

popuptoaster

  • Guest
No more flying
« Reply #22 on: September 05, 2008, 20:37:25 PM »
more people have died in car crashes in the last 100 years than have died in all the wars since history began and you feel safer in a car?

Over a million people a year die in, or because of road transport!

i bet you think you might win the lottery as well. lol

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk