Assuming the crash will throw everybody forwards violently, I can see it would minimize the arc of movement that your torso and head would traverse, but wouldn’t it also increase the chance you’d just straighforwardly ram the seatback in front of you with the top of your head, breaking your neck very high up (C3, C4?)?*
Also, don’t planes generally compress the passenger rows a lot more (i.e., less leg room) than they used to, say, 20 or 30 years ago… and does the crash position take that into account, or is it simply the same instruction as it was back then?
What would be safer in today’s sardine-can commercial jets – the crash position, or sitting upright with a tri**-point seatbelt (including the diagonal one across the chest, just like in cars) protecting you, with stronger structural supports in/under the seats so they don’t all collapse like a deck of cards?
Not that that’s necessarily a bad thing. If I’m going to die in a gigantic fireball anyway, I’d prefer paralysis from the neck down to feeling my whole body burn, but having a broken neck would preclude me from saving myself in an otherwise survivable scenario. Classic Hobson’s Choice, really.
Or maybe a more suspenders-like system across both collarbones (or something like that) would be better and/or safer. Whatever… just something in addition to the lap belt, is what I’m after.
Just substitute “Plane crash” for “World is coming to an end” and you get the general idea.
Barman: Did you say the world is coming to an end? Shouldn’t we all lie on the floor or put paper bags over our heads?
Ford: If you like.
Barman: Will it help?
Ford: Not at all.
It gives you something to think about while the plane continues its flight to oblivion.
The alternative is they tell you, “We are fucked. We are all going to die, well most of us anyway, so just talk among yourselves while the crew continue their futile attempts to save us. No panicking please, let’s die in an orderly manner. Thank you for flying United.”
Mythbusters took this on once. The myth was that the ‘crash position’ makes it more likely that the passenger will die, ultimately saving insurance costs because it’s cheaper to pay for a death than a disabling injury. Their tests concluded that death is less likely in the crash position.
The brace position is supposed to help in minor to moderate, survivable accidents such as an abnormal landing or runway over-run. A proper crash will probably kill everyone on board. A diagonal shoulder strap may be better, a four point harness would be better than that, and a five point harness as worn by the pilots would be even better, helmets may be useful as would be nomex flying overalls, it would also probably be best if everyone was facing backwards. At some point increasing safety for the sake of very rare events is not worth the cost or discomfort. The market seems to have decided that this point is having people wear lap belts.
I think there are at least two things in favour of bending forward:
(1) You are less likely to be hit by flying debris in the cabin.
(2) Your head won’t hit the seat in front of you with such force when the plane stops suddenly.
Christ that’s a stupid myth. With a moment’s thought you’d (general you) realise that passenger deaths are much more costly in terms of future airline revenue than injuries are.
Okay, if I’m ever in this scenario of being told to assume the crash position, I’ll certainly do it and hope for the best, even as I kiss my ass goodbye.
It is interesting that the settlements for the severely disabled are so much greater than for passenger deaths, though. [cue ominous music]
The “crash position” is different whetheer you have the back rest in front of you colose by or not. If the backrest is close, as is most often the case, you are supposed to rest forearms and forehead on the backrest in front of you.
They say the airlines object to shoulder straps on account that passengers would not like them but I do not inderstand this because if they are made mandatory and all airlines use them then passengers have no choice and people are quite used to them in cars already anyway. I would have no problem with shoulder straps.
But that only applies if you assume airline executives willingness to act in their own long-term interest outweighs their short-term greed and fear of personal-injury lawyers. Given the state of the airlines, I’m not sure that’s supported by the evidence.
I met him in person when I was in the fourth grade. It’s probably what turned me on to the field of energetic materials (i.e. rockets). He was a good man.
Well, how are you going to sue the airline if you’re dead? Most families of crash victims are just going to want the cost of burying the remains. A few victim’s families might want to sue for wrongful death. Life insurance would cover a number of these people too.
If an airliner with 400 passengers crashes and everyone survives but is severely disabled, then the airline will have 400 people suing and they’re going to sue for whatever it’s going to cost for each of them to have long term care, permanent disability, etc plus some random 10 digit figure. These 400 people might never be able to walk again, not to mention go to work and earn a living. These people aren’t going to have a very high quality of life ever again.
Bear in mind though that airplane crashes are an extremely rare occurrence and the abovementioned scenario would not ever actually happen. There’s not that much of a variance in the degree of severity of a plane crash. Either everyone survives and a few people are injured or everybody dies except for that one guy who climbed out of the hole in the fuselage just before the jet fuel ignited.
