Experts Say Hitching a Ride In an Airliner's Wheel Well Is Not a Good Idea 239
Hugh Pickens DOT Com (2995471) writes "Hasani Gittens reports that as miraculous as it was that a 16-year-old California boy was able to hitch a ride from San Jose to Hawaii and survive, it isn't the first time a wheel-well stowaway has lived to tell about it. The FAA says that since 1947 there have been 105 people who have tried to surreptitiously travel in plane landing gear — with a survival rate of about 25 percent. But agency adds that the actual numbers are probably higher, as some survivors may have escaped unnoticed, and bodies could fall into the ocean undetected. Except for the occasional happy ending, hiding in the landing gear of a aircraft as it soars miles above the Earth is generally a losing proposition. According to an FAA/Wright State University study titled 'Survival at High Altitudes: Wheel-Well Passengers,' at 20,000 feet the temperature experienced by a stowaway would be -13 F, at 30,000 it would be -45 in the wheel well — and at 40,000 feet, the mercury plunges to a deadly -85 F (PDF). 'You're dealing with an incredibly harsh environment,' says aviation and security expert Anthony Roman. 'Temperatures can reach -50 F, and oxygen levels there are barely sustainable for life.' Even if a strong-bodied individual is lucky enough to stand the cold and the lack of oxygen, there's still the issue of falling out of the plane. 'It's almost impossible not to get thrown out when the gear opens,' says Roman.
So how do the lucky one-in-four survive? The answer, surprisingly, is that a few factors of human physiology are at play: As the aircraft climbs, the body enters a state of hypoxia—that is, it lacks oxygen—and the person passes out. At the same time, the frigid temperatures cause a state of hypothermia, which preserves the nervous system. 'It's similar to a young kid who falls to the bottom of an icy lake," says Roman. "and two hours later he survives, because he was so cold.'"
So how do the lucky one-in-four survive? The answer, surprisingly, is that a few factors of human physiology are at play: As the aircraft climbs, the body enters a state of hypoxia—that is, it lacks oxygen—and the person passes out. At the same time, the frigid temperatures cause a state of hypothermia, which preserves the nervous system. 'It's similar to a young kid who falls to the bottom of an icy lake," says Roman. "and two hours later he survives, because he was so cold.'"
Thank goodness for these experts. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Now I'm waiting for a community service announcement like this one in an old episode of The Young Ones [youtube.com]. Fast forward to 5:07 :
"The BBC would like to warn all small children that pushing people inside old fridges is a bloody stupid thing to do."
Re: (Score:2)
I'm glad the "experts" cleared that up for me. I guess I'll have to change my vacation plans!
Yeah... I'll have to remember to bring my coat, and extra bungee cords and parachute..
Terrorists, not tourists (Score:2)
I guess the memo had a misspelling. The wheel wells seem to be a good place for terrorists, not for tourists.
If someone can sneak up to the plane and climb in, it should be equally easy to put a bomb there. If a 16-year-old can find a way to squeeze into that space, it wouldn't be too difficult to fit in a couple hundred pounds of explosives.
Re: (Score:2)
If a 16-year-old can find a way to squeeze into that space, it wouldn't be too difficult to fit in a couple hundred pounds of explosives.
Would you even need that much? Some thermite wrapped around a critical linkage, and the best the plane can do is belly-flop onto the tarmac.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They go on to say that you should not set yourself on fire or enjoy a nice hot cup of bleach on a cold day.
Missed the obvious... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I think the obvious thing missing is the two giant elephants in the room.
1) If a 15 year old boy can do this so can someone with a bomb. Where are the cameras and the
security guards watching the cameras. It's much easier to find someone to plant a bomb on a plane
if they don't also have to be a passenger. We should stop strip searching the passengers and spend
this money on actually monitoring the runway.
2) This is not the first time that extreme cold + lack of oxygen has caused a human to go into suspend
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Missed the obvious... (Score:5, Interesting)
Depends on the aircraft type. In the main wheel bay of an A330 you can easily fit a whole family, since the bay is the same size as that of an A340 which has an extra body gear. Some aircraft also have versions with or without an extra fuel tank in the belly, and that space is usually wide open if this extra fuel tank isn't installed.
In one company I used to fly for, someone had flown multiple legs in an A330's wheel bay before his body was finally found when someone noticed a strange smell... According to the report I read, he might have survived the first leg from Africa but remained unconscious and then died on the second leg. I don't remember after how many flights he was finally found.
watch out for those airfield bulls, they're mean (Score:2)
Stainless steel hobo?
Re: (Score:2)
That's 25% of known cases. The unknown cases include those where the body falls out before landing or where the person survived the ordeal and scurries off without anyone knowing.
Re:Missed the obvious... (Score:4, Informative)
Survivor: Wheel Well (Score:5, Funny)
i'd watch it.
Re: (Score:2)
Survival rate under-estimated? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Survival rate under-estimated? (Score:5, Insightful)
If they fall into the ocean when the gears open, many dead may have not been discovered either.
Re: (Score:2)
Then again some of those may have been alive! ;D
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, at least until they hit the water at 700km/h...
Eh, terminal velocity in the lower atmosphere is abound 250 km/h. Not that it would make much of a difference though.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh, terminal velocity in the lower atmosphere is abound 250 km/h.
. . . that's cruising speed on the German Autobahn.
Re:Survival rate under-estimated? (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, terminal SPEED is the result of drag forces that scale like bv^2 opposing motion. The horizontal velocity component v_0 decays to zero like, lessee, v_x(t) = mv_0/(b v_0 t + m), just as the vertical component approaches the value where drag force balances gravitation like a hyperbolic tangent with a similar characteristic time. The real question is how long one is in the air relative to the drag and mass, that is, if dimensionless b v_0 t/m >> 1. A small person wearing a big puffy jacket (small m, large b) might do much better than a big guy wearing a tight wetsuit. With a v_0 on the order of hundreds of meters per second and greater than terminal speed, one of the times it is actually better to fall from a larger height rather than a smaller one to allow initial speed to decay to terminal speed.
There are a number of cases on record of people falling out of moving airplanes (presumably travelling at speeds order of 300 to 800 kph, well above terminal speed) who survived, usually by falling into deep snow, soft plowed fields, just the right patch of springy trees. A VERY few weren't even terribly injured. And you are dead right -- water, an incompressible fluid, is literally "as hard as concrete" when struck at high speed. Because it isn't compressible, the collision has to literally move the quite massive water out of the way. People who jump from bridges don't always or even generally drown -- they break bones, rupture their body cavity, suffer massive internal brain trauma. There is an amusing, not-quite-tongue-in-cheek section in the Worst Case Scenario Survival Guide on surviving a fall out of a plane several kilometers high over water. Falling bluff (maximize b), turning vertical at the last moment, enter feet first and streamlined and keep those butt-cheeks clenched as we don't want to explode our intestines via a power enema.
With luck one breaks ones legs, pops a few disks, remains conscious, floats back to the surface in time to breathe, and can then stay afloat with broken legs and internal injuries until somebody pulls you out of the water and gets you to medical care. I'm sure one "can" learn to enter the water perfectly enough to do better than this -- cliff divers manage it at a significant fraction of terminal speed -- but it's one of those experiences most of us would be better off avoiding...:-)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, commercial airliners won't deploy landing gear while traveling at 700 km/h. It would be under 400, most likely closer to 250 on final approach.
Re: (Score:2)
The dead body undercount is potentially detectable, if someone were to compare over-water approaches with over-land approaches; if a significant number of bodies are going missing, this should show up as a skew in the survival rate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would assume that if a person in reckless enough to try this in the first place they aren't the kind of people to carefully calculate where their body lands.
No, but they may be the kind of people who choose one sort of destination over another.
Re:Survival rate under-estimated? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Better get your baby feet on pretty quickly. Big heavy things are rolling over that slab on a fairly regular basis. It's not a good place to loiter.
Another thing this does is show just how ineffective security theatre is around airports. That could've been a large bomb strapped to that landing gear, wired to go off at 35,000 ft. Damaging the gear enough to make the plane do a cartwheel on live TV when it tries
Physically Impossible (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Physically Impossible (Score:5, Informative)
Mercury can't plunge to -85 degrees Fahrenheit. It solidifies at -37.8922 degrees Fahrenheit. Fail.
-85 F is approximately 210 K. Mercury can plunge damn close [springerimages.com] to that as a liquid.
You just need a near-vacuum.
Somewhat ironic that you failed to consider the effect of pressure on phase, especially given this was referencing a high-altitude LOW PRESSURE scenario, but you pedantically cited the freezing point value at standard pressure.
Ouch.
Re:Physically Impossible (Score:5, Funny)
Pedant troll failure out pedanted by pedant.
Re: (Score:3)
So explain why a stowaway is carrying mercury in an open container?
Don't they have enough on their hands without probably mercury poisoning? Is it really going to be packed with "things I'll need on the flight".
Re: (Score:2)
I think others have replied to you already, but I will too.
40C and 40F is the meeting point of both measurements and on a mercury thermometer it goes much lower than that point.
You should check your facts before spouting statements with such assurance.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That 'truth in advertising' thing working is against you. This is another classic example of the marketing department working against the engineering department, with the %$#@! marketeers winning, again, sadly.
Just to back up my point, don't those things flip over when on 45 MPH curves? (/flame) Sorry about trying to make that last point. Please drive responsible and always most-carefully. Live long and prosper.
No frequent flyer miles either... (Score:2)
Look at the bright side! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're going to pass out anyway ... (Score:2)
Also, bring hard liquor. The hardest stuff you can find. Anything else might freeze.
What I want to know is ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Why do they bother with all of the ridiculous security protocols for airline passengers when apparently it's pretty easy to sneak a 16-year-old-kid-sized bomb into the wheel well of an aircraft on the tarmac?
So much neater and easier than trying to sneak weapons through airport security. And the best part is, you don't have to commit suicide to take the plane down.
Seriously, airplane security is clearly full of holes and the sham of passenger security checks is just that, a sham meant to make us 'feel' safe while wasting our time and shoveling tons of dollars to the TSA.
Re:What I want to know is ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, airplane security is clearly full of holes and the sham of passenger security checks is just that, a sham meant to make us 'feel' safe while wasting our time and shoveling tons of dollars to the TSA.
Well, any good government repression solves multiple problems, but the point of TSA is behavioral conditioning - giving away tons of money to political cronies is just a bonus.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
..but you can buy 10 kilos+ of food and other stuff from the airport.
Re: (Score:2)
What's the last time you flew? All airports are arranged as following
Airport -> Security Checkpoint -> Terminal -> Plane
All airports have tons of crap for sale in the terminal, ranging from sit in restaurants, to fast food, to souveniers after you've gotten past security. This has lead me to discover some hilarious things.... like a TGI Fridays that gave you plastic forks, knives, and spoons to eat with while serving you steak. Never again, TGIF. Never again.
Re: (Score:3)
I fly business class a fair amount - and when they serve lunch/dinner I get nice, metal forks, butter knives, and serrated steak knives. All served with a smile and an "enjoy your meal sir!"
Why worry about smuggling a knife onto a plane? Just book business/first class, enjoy yourself one last time, and then do your worst with the tools the airline graciously provided for you.
Re: (Score:3)
airplane security is clearly full of holes
I had to reread that a few times to realize you didn't forget an 'A'.
Re:What I want to know is ... (Score:4, Interesting)
You want really scary: Off the shelf 10-20kg RC Plane packed full of explosives and with an FPV system to make a simple and cheap guided missile. They can be made fast enough to keep up with a plane just after takeoff or before landing, or while it is flying in the ATC pattern. Might not even be seen at night (though I guess they have bird warning systems).
Or what if someone lands an explosive filled drone on a taxiing plane and latches on, detonating during or after takeoff.
With modern RC autopilots they can even be automated. Just program multicopter autopilot to go and sit stationary 10m off the middle of the runway, if you aren't moving then radar is probably unlikely to see you.
High speed trains are even worse. No way can they guard hundreds of miles of track against anvils being tossed onto them (or bombs put in their exceptionally predictable (in both time and location) path).
Or what if someone programs a drone to fly a nail bomb into a crowded stadium, or the Kabah during Haj. GPS means they can be launched hundreds of miles away.
One can only come to the conclusion that either the terrorists are remarkably incompetent/unimaginative, or that they are basically non-existant, and we are wasting our time and money doing anything at all.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to make the airport folks even more paranoid, why not just set off a wheelie-suitcase containing explosives, shrapnel, and warfarin powder in the security checkpoint line?
Re: (Score:2)
I think we can accurately come to the conclusion that the current crop of fundamental Islamist terrorists are remarkably incompetent.
For example take Richard Reid aka the "shoe bomber". Only a completely incompetent idiot tries to light a fuse in full view of everyone, rather than take the simple expediency of locking yourself in the toilet!!!
To underline how stupid and incompetent they are the "underwear bomber" made exactly the same critical mistake.
Re: (Score:2)
For example take Richard Reid aka the "shoe bomber". Only a completely incompetent idiot tries to light a fuse in full view of everyone, rather than take the simple expediency of locking yourself in the toilet!!!
To underline how stupid and incompetent they are the "underwear bomber" made exactly the same critical mistake.
The underwear bomber apparently spent 20 minutes in the bathroom preparing the device. I don't know why he didn't just try to light it in the bathroom. Anyways, it doesn't matter, since in both cases the devices were faulty anyways. If they had been in working order, they would have succeeded because they had sufficient time before the passengers reacted.
Re: (Score:3)
I think it is a mix of all of the above. Terrorists are rare (not quite non-existent) and are obviously incompetent and unimaginative. At most airports, one could fill an entire full-sized bus with explosives as long as it was labelled "Hertz" on the side, drive it right up to a place in front of the main terminal, and detonate it as a suicide bomber on any of the busy travel days of the year. If one wore the right uniform, one could probably get out, walk around to the off-side of the bus, jump into a g
Re: (Score:2)
not like there is some sort of security force there that could... protect the integrity of the planes, the airfield and to make sure people shouldn't get where they shouldn't be...
Maybe they could come up with something... call them I don't know Transportation Security?
Wheel-well traveling 101: (Score:5, Informative)
2. Bring oxygen (that's going to be the hard part. Several hours worth of oxygen).
3. Familiarize yourself with various plane types so you don't get crushed by an unsuitable wheel well design.
4. Secure yourself to the plane so you don't get thrown out during landing.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Your points 1. and 2. are wrong. Have you read the article ? Hypothermia and hypoxia preserve the body during the flight.
More precisely, although hypothermia and hypoxia will generally kill you, once in a while you'll get lucky and they'll counter each others' fatal effects just enough that you manage not to die.
If it was me, I'd rather ensure that I'm equipped to avoid the effects of both. Or else, you know, travel inside the plane, in the environment designed and regulated for human comfort. There are no little packets of peanuts in the wheel well, for example.
Re: (Score:2)
1. buy a ticket and seat in the cabin
Re:Wheel-well traveling 101: (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
This is why you want to increases the ratio of oxygen in the gas mixture you breathe when ambient pressure drops. If ambient pressure is only 25% of what it is at sea level, you'll need to adjust the gas mixture to 80% O2, 20%N2 to have roughly the same partial pressure of oxygen.
The acclimatization is more a matter of coping with the lower CO2 level (CO2 partial pressure also drops, causing th
Re:Wheel-well traveling 101: (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is the pressure, only 26% at 10km of what you have on ground. Oxygen getting absorbed in your lungs depends on that pressure, less pressure, less oxygen gets to your blood.
No, oxygen getting absorbed into your lungs depends on the partial pressure of oxygen in your breathing gas. Partial pressure is the pressure multiplied by the percentage of the gas in question.
At sea level, the partial pressure of oxygen, ppO2 is 0.21, because the pressure is one atmosphere and the air is 21% oxygen. You can obviously survive just fine on a ppO2 of 0.21. If you're in an environment with 0.26 atm ambient pressure and breathing air, you're getting a ppO2 of 0.26 *0.21 = 0.05 atm. Generally, 0.16 atm is considered the minimum safe ppO2, though that's a pretty conservative number. But 0.05 is not enough to keep you alive. If you're breathing pure O2 at that pressure, though, the ppO2 is 0.26, which is higher than the ppO2 of air at sea level, so you'll be just fine (as long as you avoid freezing to death).
Incidentally, SCUBA divers worry about excessively high ppO2 levels, because oxygen is toxic. Generally, divers try to keep their ppO2 below 1.4 atm, which means that breathing air becomes dangerous at depths greater than 220 feet (of course, at those depths the ppN2 of air is generally already having a huge narcotic effect so diving that deep on air is a bad idea for other reasons). For deeper dives, therefore, divers use gas mixtures with less O2.
Such deep, technical, diving is pretty rare, though. What's very common is diving with air that has been enriched with additional O2, usually to 32% or 36% O2, called nitrox. The purpose of this is to lower ppN2 levels during the dive, to reduce nitrogen absorption by the tissues and therefore increase the amount of bottom time without needing decompression stops to safely offgas the N2. Many divers also think the higher O2 levels make them feel better during and after the dive. However, with 36% O2 (EAN36), ppO2 reaches 1.4 atm at only 128 feet so divers breathing nitrox have to be careful to stay shallower. Smart Nitrox divers test their breathing gas O2 percentage before every dive and calculate a floor below which they must not go.
For example Mount Everest climbers, if they just ran from 0m to top of Everest they would pass out, extra oxygen or no.
The top of Mount Everest is about 0.33 atm, which means a 100% O2 mixture would provide them with more oxygen than they get at sea level. The reason they have to acclimate first is that carrying enough O2 to breathe 100% O2 is impractical. It would require carrying thousands of cubic feet of compressed gas. By acclimating themselves they increase their bodies' ability to utilize lower ppO2 levels. Depending on their fitness levels and degree of acclimatization, they may be able to get to a point where they don't require supplemental oxygen. Most, though, will need some.
Re: (Score:2)
21% is not an amount. It's a proportion. As others have pointed out, the partial pressure of oxygen is what matters. Decrease the pressure but increase the proportion of oxygen and you keep the amount the same.
Flying experience (Score:5, Funny)
What I get out of this story is that, if you're lucky enough to survive the trip in the wheel well, it's much more convenient to travel this way than doing it the regular way: no queuing, no overcharging from the airlines, no restrictions on the amounts of liquids you can carry, no getting your gonads showered with x-rays, no groping from TSA perverts... and of course, no arbitrary, secret no-fly list that prevents you from boarding the plane in the first place.
The airport security theater almost makes me want to risk my life as a stowaway.
Re: (Score:2)
What I get out of this story is that, if you're lucky enough to survive the trip in the wheel well, it's much more convenient to travel this way than doing it the regular way: no queuing, no overcharging from the airlines, no restrictions on the amounts of liquids you can carry, no getting your gonads showered with x-rays, no groping from TSA perverts... and of course, no arbitrary, secret no-fly list that prevents you from boarding the plane in the first place.
The airport security theater almost makes me want to risk my life as a stowaway.
And no waiting in the queue for the toilet either.
Re: (Score:2)
Waiting in the queue for the toilet is prohibited. It's what terrorists do before they strike.
Re: (Score:3)
What I get out of this story is that, if you're lucky enough to survive the trip in the wheel well, it's much more convenient to travel this way than doing it the regular way: no queuing, no overcharging from the airlines, no restrictions on the amounts of liquids you can carry, no getting your gonads showered with x-rays, no groping from TSA perverts... and of course, no arbitrary, secret no-fly list that prevents you from boarding the plane in the first place.
The airport security theater almost makes me want to risk my life as a stowaway.
I'm not sure about that. For the (surviving) wheel-well travelers, all of that unpleasantness simply comes after the flight. They may not use the backscatter X-ray machine, but I'm sure there will be a far more thorough examination than the TSA would give you, which you will receive on a regular basis. There are also far more limits on what items you can bring with you, not just liquids.
This warning reads like a challenge to me (Score:3, Interesting)
... is that sick?
So there are three factors that you need to deal with apparently.
1. The cold.
Solution: Get yourself a really good jacket. Something you could take to the north pole... should be enough.
2. Lack of oxygen.
Solution: Get yourself an O2 tank... The kind they take to Everest. Just something to supplement the air you're breathing.
3. Falling out of the god damn airplane.
Solution: Some basic mountaineering gear would likely do the trick. Just ropes and clamps.
All told, what you seem to need are high altitude mountaineering gear. So, some cold weather gear, an oxygen bottle, and some ropes. Doubtless it would be a nasty ride but you'd probably survive.
Re: (Score:2)
The equipment you are suggesting costs quite a bit more than a plane ticket, even including the extra baggage fee and the $10 soggy sandwich.
Re: (Score:2)
Does it really though?
The only expensive bit is the coat... lets say that's 500 to 1000 dollars and even that is if you're paying retail.
If you want to go cheap you can probably "make" coat out of old blankets. It doesn't have to be pretty or light. You're not going to move once you're in the wheel well. You're just going to sit in there and not move. So it can be heavy and clunky. Which means in so far as a coat is concerned it can be quite light.
Now in regards to oxygen, you're just looking for a basic ta
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
whatever... the point is that if you wrap up, get some O2, and some ropes you're good.
Re: (Score:2)
The absolute cheapest you can buy a compressed gas tank for is about $100. I don't know how much the mask would be but I'm betting another $100.
A ticket for the same trip is $450.
So... yea, if YOU want to risk your life to save less than $200, go right ahead.
Re: (Score:2)
well again... and I feel like I must have said this about 5 times already... its reusable.
So... yeah... the economy on the first trip isn't amazing. But if you make a point of doing this like some skybound hobo then your ongoing costs would be pretty low. You'd just have to refill the O2 tank between trips.
And obviously it isn't practical to actually do this... what the fuck are you talking about? Hitching a ride in the wheel well of a commercial airliner? Fucking ridiculous. It was a stupid idea before 9/1
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
All told, what you seem to need are high altitude mountaineering gear. So, some cold weather gear, an oxygen bottle, and some ropes. Doubtless it would be a nasty ride but you'd probably survive.
The only thing left is about... the crushing risk. And radical sudden air pressure changes you may be exposed to.
Also... the difficulty of getting in and escaping while carrying all this gear.
In this heavy winter gear... you will likely stand out for sure.
Re: (Score:2)
how much more risk will there be if you run out there with nothing? It seems pretty similar.
As to air pressure changes, that is unpleasant but not life threatening.
Re: (Score:2)
All told, what you seem to need are high altitude mountaineering gear. So, some cold weather gear, an oxygen bottle, and some ropes. Doubtless it would be a nasty ride but you'd probably survive.
The only thing left is about... the crushing risk. And radical sudden air pressure changes you may be exposed to.
Also... the difficulty of getting in and escaping while carrying all this gear.
In this heavy winter gear... you will likely stand out for sure.
Why radical, sudden pressure changes? The plane doesn't teleport to altitide, it has to fly there. A quick search led me to an airline pilots forum, where they say it generally takes 25-35 minutes to climb to cruising altitude in a 747. Doesn't seem to radical to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget snacks, water, and diapers.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need any of that to stay alive. Possibly you need it to be comfortable but that's a different story.
Meanwhile.. (Score:2, Insightful)
"Normal People Also Say Hitching a Ride In an Airliner's Wheel Well Is Not a Good Idea"
Units converted in celcius and metric (Score:5, Informative)
For those outside of Lybia, USA, and Burma:
20,000 feet = 6km
40,000 feet = 12,2km
-13F = -25C
-85F = -65C
Young kids these days (Score:5, Funny)
Bah. You kids these days...
Back in my day, we didn't complain about the cold and lack of oxygen. We rode in unpressurized planes with open gun ports. Sure, it was cold -- we wore fur lined jackets and liked it. Our oxygen masks smelled like engine exhaust and we were grateful. You didn't here us whine about 'being crushed by landing gear' or 'being thrown from the plane'. We were being shot at. Hell, we were lucky to have landing gear at all when we got back.
So, stop your bitching and get off my damn lawn.
Written for my grandfather who manned a gun in a WWII bomber.
Re: (Score:2)
You didn't here us whine about 'being crushed by landing gear' or 'being thrown from the plane'. We were being shot at. Hell, we were lucky to have landing gear at all when we got back.
Written for my grandfather who manned a gun in a WWII bomber.
Ball-turret gunners may have had some additional concerns regarding crushing.
Obligatory (Score:2)
Experts Say Hitching a Ride In an Airliner's Wheel Well Is Not a Good Idea
http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120930201320/fairytail/images/3/30/You_don't_say.png [nocookie.net]
http://youtu.be/b6qyX1L8p_Q [youtu.be]
Surviving such a harsh climate intrigues me (Score:2)
Given the physiological limitations of the human body, when I first read this story and everyone was screaming about security, I was thinking how did he survive? I've done some skydives from 30,000 feet, obviously with full O2 mask, warm clothing, etc. And been to a few chamber ride classes. Whole security thing we can argue for eternity but comment of, "frigid temperatures cause a state of hypothermia, which preserves the nervous system." Now that's interesting.
I never would ever consider riding in a whee
Re: (Score:3)
Re:units (Score:4, Funny)
Would that be a crazy diamond with a weight given in carats, or a crazy diamond with a weight given in SI kilograms?
I'm just sayin'...
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
"By the end of the 20th century, most countries used the Celsius scale rather than the Fahrenheit scale. Fahrenheit remains the official scale for the following countries: the Bahamas, Belize, the Cayman Islands, Palau, and the United States and associated territories (Puerto Rico, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands)."
Yep. Archaic or just retarded?
Re: (Score:2)
I thought Fahrenheit had been relegated to unofficial status in the US (?)
Re: (Score:2)
it's still strong...
I prefer the Bob and Doug metric conversion. whatever it is, double it and add 32. so a metric 6 pack is actually 44 metric beers. Metric does have it's upsides!
Re:units (Score:4, Insightful)
Cos the equivalent in Celsius would just be totally confusing!
40 = dangerously hot
25 = warm
0 = cold
-20 = dangerously cold.
I mean, who has the time for those crazy numbers?!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Answering anonymous troll, I know, but the reason the US uses Imperial units is simply cultural momentum. We're used to these units and have learned them intuitively. Metric is taught in schools, used in science, and everyone with an education knows it and the approximate conversion factors (2.54, 3.3, 1.6, 2.2, 9/5+32, etc.), and maybe someday there'll be a switch - but the mathematical convenience is just not worth the cultural effort required right now.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The way you spell and the asshole nature of your post suggests you, too, are American.
Bunch of Americans calling each other assholes in here... yep, business as usual.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Regardless of what you just said, imperial units are still ridiculous, and it sounds like someone touched a nerve to get that response from you :) Yes, every country on the planet has a unique quality - trying to explain the joke of still using imperial units in the 21st century as a quirk of character is ridiculous. Units are designed to ease the recording and/or transmission of measurements, meaning the more people use them, the more useful they are. Using imperial units is as sensible as using an Iroq
Re: (Score:2)
and it sounds like someone touched a nerve to get that response from you
The post itself didn't, the "5 Insightful" it received did, however. It has been addressed though.
pointing out an anachronism which is actively hurting the US's participation in the world stage is not bashing
Try looking at the content of his post, it was much more than "pointing out." Anyways, it isn't hurting the US's participation any more than our use of the English language is. In fact, a simple unit conversion is much more surmountable to the everyday person than a language barrier. Going into your comparison, you may as well argue that since a larger population of the world speaks Hindi and Chinese, we ought
Re:units (Score:5, Informative)
The US gallon (3.78541 liters) is different than the Imperial gallon (4.54609 liters). Fluid ounces are different too. 128 US fluid oz in a US gallon, 160 imperial fluid ounces in an Imperial gallon. So a US oz is 1.04084 Imp oz.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Wow, there's such a thing as "US units"?
Oh yes.
The big gulp.
The Supersize.
The happy meal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The first part I get, but how does "bodies falling into the ocean" mean the survival numbers are probably higher?
It means all the numbers: quite likely there are more stowaways who fell into water-or woods even-and never had their bodies recovered, and some stowaways could have safely made it undetected. So there is know way to know the true survival rate.