You may be in control of your vehicle, but that 19 or 83 year old may not have the same driving ability before they strike you after losing control, texting, not paying attention, sleeping, DWI, etc.

Much safer to be in control of a professional.

Something doesn't smell right with this crash --- 8 minutes of descent from cruising altitude without any transmission of trouble. Hopefully we learn all the facts soon.

QuakerOats;1716073 wrote:Something doesn't smell right with this crash --- 8 minutes of descent from cruising altitude without any transmission of trouble. Hopefully we learn all the facts soon.

Ezperts today were saying that the last thing the pilot does is give a mayday and communicate problems if they are severe as they are doing everything possible to correct it.

QuakerOats;1716073 wrote:Something doesn't smell right with this crash --- 8 minutes of descent from cruising altitude without any transmission of trouble. Hopefully we learn all the facts soon.

Probably Obama's fault.

QuakerOats;1716073 wrote:Something doesn't smell right with this crash --- 8 minutes of descent from cruising altitude without any transmission of trouble. Hopefully we learn all the facts soon.

You imply "something doesn't smell right with this crash to me". A more accurate statement would be "Just moments ago, I read on Drudgereport that something seems suspicious about this crash and instead of referencing the article, I'll pass is off as my own conclusion'"

Here is Belly rational:

take the plane ... Plane goes down with just me traveling .... Bigger pay out for my family, my goal is to make sure my family is provided for after my death... Goal has been fulfilled mofo...
Take the plane ... Plane goes down with family ... No goal of providing is required, we are together
most likely some member of my family not going to be on the plane at the same time ... Bigger pay out for them, it all works out in the end..

Belly rational is the best rational

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1716091 wrote:You imply "something doesn't smell right with this crash to me". A more accurate statement would be "Just moments ago, I read on Drudgereport that something seems suspicious about this crash and instead of referencing the article, I'll pass is off as my own conclusion'"

Actually I saw the report that said the plane descended from cruising altitude over an 8 minute span without communicating any distress to ATC, and knowing a little bit about aviation I thought that was a bit odd. You often over-think things about my thought processes, to your detriment.

QuakerOats;1716105 wrote:Actually I saw the report that said the plane descended from cruising altitude over an 8 minute span without communicating any distress to ATC, and knowing a little bit about aviation I thought that was a bit odd. You often over-think things about my thought processes, to your detriment.

If I was wrong, then I apologize.

jesus, did that thing literally crash into the side of a mountain?

gut;1716124 wrote:jesus, did that thing literally crash into the side of a mountain?

Yes.



Looks like debris slid down the slope and collected in the ridge line.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1716120 wrote:If I was wrong, then I apologize.

No harm; no foul. Hopefully they can figure out what truly happened.

QuakerOats;1716130 wrote:No harm; no foul. Hopefully they can figure out what truly happened.

The "professional pilot" in charge of keeping these people alive screwed up....flew the plane into the side of a fucking mountain and all 150 were killed.

Again...I prefer driving if at all possible.

We have absolutely no idea whether pilot error of any kind was involved thus far.

I tend to doubt it was pilot error (at least solely) because the vast majority of the time it is a mechanical/maintenance issue, or something else nefarious.

I take 100+ flights a year. 2 times this past year I felt scared. Once when landing in NYC and the wind was pushing us big time and making the left wing raise the plane and again when landing in Cusco, Peru...because you come over a mountain and basically drop thousands of feet to hit the runway.

I take 100+ trips to and from the airport. Multiple times I have had to slam on brakes, ease off the accelerator to let some idiot not paying attention into the lane. I see a fatal accident a few times a year, etc.

Never would I advise anyone to drive over fly if the cost is the same. To think driving is safer is ludicrous. Even if you think you are in control, I guarantee every single person on this board has had the "oh shit" feeling when they stop paying attention for a second and almost get into a bad accident. And "mechanical issues" that cause a plane to go down...please. You are kidding yourself if you think a car doesnt have as many, if not more mechanical issues that could cause a deadly accident.

If nothing else, Tiernan is still kicking it. So its never safe to be on the roads in the USA.

sleeper;1716026 wrote:32,617 deaths from a car in the US in 2013.
265 deaths in an airplane worldwide in 2013.

Any questions?

How many people drove a car (+ how many times) compared to people who flew last year?

Old Rider;1716131 wrote:The "professional pilot" in charge of keeping these people alive screwed up....flew the plane into the side of a fucking mountain and all 150 were killed.

Again...I prefer driving if at all possible.

More people died in car crashes today. Nice try.

Old Rider;1716059 wrote:Yeah...the stats obviously show more car wrecks resulting in casualties. My point was I have a better chance of surviving a car wreck than I do falling from 35,000 feet in the air.
I can swerve my car, hit breaks, honk horns, and maybe the airbag goes off to assist as well. In a plane I have none of that. Im at the mercy of the pilot and the last mechanic who gave it the OK to take to the air!!
I like my chances behind the wheel!

^ hear, hear!

Uz2Bon36;1716137 wrote:How many people drove a car (+ how many times) compared to people who flew last year?

Driving: 1.27 fatalities for every 100 million miles traveled.
Flying: 0.00 fatalities for every 100 million miles traveled. It can't even scratch 2 decimal places. LOL

Again, anyone who thinks flying is more dangerous than driving is a fucking moron. This doesn't even factor in cases where you can be seriously injured in a car crash or other negative aspects.

Old Rider;1716131 wrote:The "professional pilot" in charge of keeping these people alive screwed up....flew the plane into the side of a fucking mountain and all 150 were killed.

Again...I prefer driving if at all possible.

And you know that how?

From everything I've read up on this (and this is mostly speculation as well), the plane had to descend because of either depressurization in the plane, a fire on the plane, or an engine failure. Had to descend under 10,000 feet. Since they were so low, they hit a mountain.

I wouldn't really "blame" the pilot in that instance. He's in the middle of the Alps and he HAS to drop below a certain altitude. Odds are you're going to crash.

Old Rider;1716131 wrote:The "professional pilot" in charge of keeping these people alive screwed up....flew the plane into the side of a fucking mountain and all 150 were killed.

Again...I prefer driving if at all possible.

Again, LOL.

sleeper;1716140 wrote:Driving: 1.27 fatalities for every 100 million miles traveled.
Flying: 0.00 fatalities for every 100 million miles traveled. It can't even scratch 2 decimal places. LOL

Again, anyone who thinks flying is more dangerous than driving is a fucking moron. This doesn't even factor in cases where you can be seriously injured in a car crash or other negative aspects.

Lol. Quit using facts!!

Uz2Bon36;1716137 wrote:How many people drove a car (+ how many times) compared to people who flew last year?

Obviously driving is going to have more people simply, well, driving.

But 8M+ people fly each day. It isnt like traveling by air is some rare occurrence.

The fact this is even a debate is mind-numbing.

Still would rather drive.