this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2024
10 points (69.2% liked)
Solarpunk Travel
633 readers
2 users here now
Community for those focused on sustainable travel. Our society's current levels of energy intensive and frequent travel are not compatible with life on a finite planet. We advocate for long-term slow travel to see the world, and low energy local travel to deeply experience your community. Green washing free zone.
related to sustainable travel:
- !trains@midwest.social ← open to all train chatter (but note the instance is centered on the midwest USA)
- !rail@feddit.uk ← UK Rail and Trains
- !ukpublictransport@feddit.uk ← UK public transport
related to travel generally:
- !travel@eviltoast.org ← general travel
- !main@lemmy.globe.pub ← general travel (this whole instance devoted to travel but note there is an instance-wide no politics rule there)
- !traveltips@feddit.uk ← Europe focus
The communities listed above are decentralized. Centralized instances are omitted as they go against the fedi purpose and it’s better to cultivate digital rights in the free world. That means instances that have a disproportionately large population or are centralized on Cloudflare are not listed.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
when was the last time a pilot even noticed they were carrying passengers?
maybe you're thinking they're like bus drivers and check your ticket as you get on the plane?
Are you perhaps thinking that the crew does not talk to the pilots and inform them about any kind of disruptions or controversy?
(edit) In fact the more I think about this, the less viable it is. If I were a pilot, I would absolutely see a passenger who is equipped to jump as a safety threat -- someone who might very well open the emergency exit latch and jump. If I were a crew member, I would be a fool not to report someone in a wing suit to the pilot.
I think the only way this could work is if the wing suit is clearly irrefutably dysfunctional. And even then there is still probably a risk that passengers feel uncomfortable.
sure, that's all fine, but a pilot wouldn't see anyone. Even if he was told, he wouldn't have to see them. He'd just say "security, deal with it".
everyone else would, which is fine, and the process would work fine.
Is English your first language? The phrase “I would absolutely see a passenger who is equipped to jump as a safety threat” does not imply a visual line of sight. In this context “see” means to have a viewpoint. Pilots regularly make decisions on whether to carry a problematic passenger without actually seeing them.
you would not see him at all, because he would not get through the airport security
no, he might not, it is not possible to open door due to their construction (pressure difference), not unless you are really close to the ground, in which case it would not matter anyway. also your main concern, if it were possible, would be being ingested by the plane's engine.
it could not. do you really think the airport security would argue with you whether it is functional or not? you would be escorted out either by the police, or the ambulance headed to loony bin.
I’m trying to get my head around how you reconcile in your own head the contradiction. If someone wearing a genuine wing suit or a fake wing suit cannot be a threat, how can you simultaneously claim they are too much of a threat to get through airport security?
stop making contradictory statements for others in your head and you won't have to try to wrap it around those made up contradictions. it can make life lot easier.
yeah, never said that. i explained why your plan to use suit as emergency device is laughable nonsense worth animated sketch in kid's show at most and i mentioned marginal scenario where it might actually be a threat to airplane, but doesn't really make sense to attempt to execute it in such case.
you may not be a threat and still not get through security. their job is not to argue with you whether your suit is functional, or to have qualification to asses that and make assumptions about what does its (non)functionality mean.
they will just err on the side of caution, kick you out and make you somebody else's problem.