Again, it's just not feasible. For a crash like this, what could be done? The size of parachute required would be hundreds and hundreds of feet across, and likely wouldn't have had enough time/altitude to deploy (even with people base jumping you need hundreds of feet). Outside of preventing the crash in the first place, there's no feasible way to design an airplane to survive that crash other than things like ejection seats, which don't make any sense with commercial airliners.Yup, and that was not my argument. Clearly things have been done to prevent crashes, but crashes are still going to happen. What I haven't seen is something to improve the survivability of a crash.
or like a bladder system. seinfeld did itGIANT AIRBAGS AROUND THE ENTIRE PLANE
There have been multiple attempts to add crash "resistance" systems....Like one where they attempted to put a chemical in the jet fuel where a catalyst could be released and instantly render it inert. Another was some kind of on board super foam, to prevent fire. (There was a whole discovery channel show on it.) In the end though, as Eomer has been saying, it's just not feasible given the logistics of passenger travel--in individual planes, they've made it safe, but they can't give everyone an ejection seat on an airliner.Yup, and that was not my argument. Clearly things have been done to prevent crashes, but crashes are still going to happen. What I haven't seen is something to improve the survivability of a crash.
Sad thing is it looks like the pilot regained control and leveled it out, just ran out of altitude.I was going to say, that must have been a solid 20 second moment of complete and utter hopelessness for the pilots.
Out of curiosity, in general terms, would whoever loaded and secured the cargo have been on the plane still?
The cause of most plane crashes really.... just ran out of altitude.
Sad thing is it looks like the pilot regained control and leveled it out, just ran out of altitude.
LOLThe cause of most plane crashes really.
They probably have one or use local facilities so much it might as well be declared a US base. The UK has bases dotted about the middle east that don't have much attention brought to them so I would be surprised if the US doesn't do the same.According to National Airlines, the U.S.-based cargo carrier, Flight NCR102, had just taken off from Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan en route to Dubai, United Arab Emirates, when the crash occurred.
why was it going to Dubai?does the US now have a base there?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22333555Beneath the cloudless desert skies of the United Arab Emirates, a squadron of RAF Tornado jets is currently based at Al-Minhad, a discreet and well-guarded airbase south of Dubai.
In Bahrain, at another military base well out of the public eye and set apart from that country's simmering unrest, Royal Navy personnel man the naval HQ known as the UK Maritime Component Command (UKMCC), directing Britain's minesweepers and frigates around the Gulf, in co-ordination with the far larger US Navy 5th Fleet headquarters.
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/...-same-materialJust do the god damn plane in the same material as the black box, problem solved !
I dunno, looked like it was in a full stall pretty much the entire time, and the pilot likely had little or no control of the plane.Sad thing is it looks like the pilot regained control and leveled it out, just ran out of altitude.
Not feasible is a bullshit excuse. I want some Demolition Man foam to protect my ass!There have been multiple attempts to add crash "resistance" systems....Like one where they attempted to put a chemical in the jet fuel where a catalyst could be released and instantly render it inert. Another was some kind of on board super foam, to prevent fire. (There was a whole discovery channel show on it.) In the end though, as Eomer has been saying, it's just not feasible given the logistics of passenger travel--in individual planes, they've made it safe, but they can't give everyone an ejection seat on an airliner.
However, again like Eomer said, flying is actually one of the safest ways to move people back and forth. Just the advances in auto-pilot systems, which stop idiot humans from fucking up, have brought actual deaths down to a very very tiny amount. People say it all the time, but it bears repeating--you are far, far more likely to die in a car or even walking by a road, than on a plane.
The fact is the human body is fragile, if we want to go above a certain speed, there will be risks--the amount of risk you take for going 450+MPH in an airplane is incredible considering.
Clearly the Vespid are a superior species.man was not born with wings and therefore not meant to fly!
Nah. Load shifting the CG aft that much destroys all control stability and produces a very violent and permanent stall, there's literally just not enough weight proportionately on the wings. They could have had 20,000 feet and still would have hit the ground unless they were able to fix the load issue in flight.Sad thing is it looks like the pilot regained control and leveled it out, just ran out of altitude.
If it was an actual military transport and they had some (a lot) more height thenmaybethey could have opened the tail door and dropped it out the back. Possibly. A very small chance.I know planes can flush their fuel (something about them being too heavy to land with a full tank). Isn't there a way to flush the cargo if things go south? Or would it be worthless in a case like this because the flushing mechanism would likely be fubar'd by the moving cargo?