|
On July 07 2013 13:19 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2013 11:31 Ig wrote:On July 07 2013 10:51 TheRabidDeer wrote:
I would be irritated too if somebody called me out about using something while he himself used that same thing. If he tries to defend his first comment saying it was sarcasm, then its in poor taste and he's setting an equally poor example. If he defends it as a poor assumption and admits he messed up, then its just stupid because why would you say that in the first place? Neo admitted his first post was not sarcasm so it was simply a stupid, baseless claim. His second was sarcastic and was just him dodging Craton's question. His reaction to getting called out after that was flat out terrible. He messed up, replied sarcastically and didn't admit it in the first post afterwards, then got irritated...for being rightfully called out? Whatever Neo says about Craton's other posts is irrelevant, this is about this thread only, and he's the one that screwed up here. My question for you is why should someone who makes a baseless claim not be called out here? Would anyone say anything against someone getting called out in a similar fashion on the SC2 or Dota 2 forums? Hell no, they'd be all for it, so why are you defending the guy who made a baseless claim and also reacted poorly to getting called out on it here? Is it because he's got a red name? Edit: He said Craton jumped on his "offhand remark" when its clear now that remark was Neo attempting to dodge the question with sarcasm. Not really going to debate it, but Craton's question was hopefully also a sarcastic and rhetorical question. Series of events: Neo makes a statement which is wrong (plane is shaky) Craton makes a comment that is sarcastic/rhetorical/exaggerated ("...to look factory fresh") Neo responds with equally sarcastic response Craton responds by saying Neo is responding like an asshole, even though Craton's first response was just as much of an asshole comment Neo responds with the comment that we are discussing now. Neo's first post was simply an at a glance comment based on some pictures. It was of little substance and Craton tried to make more of it than what was there. Neo never said his first comment was sarcastic. I also dont see any major reason to call out Neo at all. Question what he meant, sure... but he kind of explained that already in the post where you are calling him out on his rant. Not going to talk about it anymore though because it is a dumb argument and wildly off topic.
Difference here is Craton's first comment is sarcastic (which is no crime in itself) but on-topic, using sarcasm to point out that Neo posted what he himself admitted was pretty much a shitpost. Neo's reply to Craton, however, is indignantly defensive and purely an attempt to cover the absurdity of his initial comment by sarcastically attacking Craton's person. If he said what he said later "I made a post off of a glimpse of a picture and I can easily admit that 90% (let's say 100%) chance that my comment is wrong.", or just laughed it off as an offhand comment in that reply, instead of turning the heat on to Craton as he did, he would not have seemed like an overly defensive asshole who won't admit to being wrong.
I'm Asian, and the posts on Twitter are amusing, rather than offensive, to me; the absurdity of the comments take the edge off any attack, and makes it seems like comments on stereotyped caricatures rather than the Asian race as a whole.
|
I've flown on Asiana Airlines #214 quite a few times, and will likely take it again unless there is conclusive evidence about lack of training or lack of maintenance from Asiana. To be honest even after this crash I don't think I would feel any safer flying United or Air China. -_-
|
I am no flight expert, but from the Korean sources I am reading right now, the problem seems to have occurred from landing gear not coming down (I don't know if it is the one in front or the back). Basically, the landing had to be done by the plane body itself.
They have identified that there were problems before landing, and therefore communications with the control tower prior to landing.
http://news.nate.com/view/20130707n07186
Here is the video from Korean news of the communication.
It seems all evacuation and fire trucks were in place and ready for emergency landing.
If this is the case (faulty landing gear => Boeing's problem), we should applaud the pilot for making this landing with minimal casualties. Also, hats off to everyone on board that helped people get to safety (Especially that American dude with broken ribs aiding more than 50 people to get off. True hero).
What really bothers me is the asian ladies GETTING OFF THE PLANE WITH A FKING CARRIER. UNBELIEVABLE. How can they be so greedy?
|
On July 07 2013 11:32 Special Endrey wrote:
man......you are lucky to be alive after your plane just crash landed = Perfect time to take a picture..................-__-;
|
My heart goes out to the two deaths. This plane departed from Shanghai, stop and Seoul and then SF. Its incredible to know that there are only 2 deaths out of 300 people onboard after seeing the video of the plane. I imagined it would have been much worse.
What really annoys me even after experience this kind of disaster, people still trying to take pictures from the phone rather get further away from the aircraft or help a fellow passengers.
|
Taking a picture after getting off isn't the problem. THOSE women were more than likely (actually, 100%) blocking and clogging the aisles trying to take out their precious luggage that are definitely worth more to them than other passengers' lives. If I was behind them, I'd knock them aside and help everyone else get off first...
|
On July 07 2013 14:59 ExceeD_DreaM wrote:
Taking a picture after getting off isn't the problem. THOSE women were more than likely (actually, 100%) blocking and clogging the aisles trying to take out their precious luggage that are definitely worth more to them than other passengers' lives. If I was behind them, I'd knock them aside and help everyone else get off first...
Definitely. I understand getting your backpack, but something like bringing a luggage to go down that slide in that situation is just asking for the airline crew just to throw it out the door for their owners to pick up once on the ground.
|
Pretty surreal, thankfully loss of life was minimal.
|
As an aircraft mechanic currently working on Boeing aircraft in Canada, I can tell you that it will take many months for the details of this accident to be fully released. I can also tell you that the 777 has an absolutely impeccable safety record; for over 1000 aircraft delivered, there have only been 3 hull loss incidents (accidents where the plane was written off). edit: (3 including the accident today)
My heart goes out to the two people who died today. It is sad that those people had to be the first and only to die in an accident of the 777, but it serves as a testament to how safe an airplane it really is. Like many of you, I am awaiting the NTSB accident reports so we as an industry can analyze the root cause and work to prevent another incident like this from ever happening again.
For any fellow TL'ers who are interested in the 777 or any other aircraft's safety record:
http://aviation-safety.net/database/type/type-stat.php?type=107
edit #2: Interesting fact, because today marked the 1st fatal accident of the Boeing 777, the survival rate for all occupants in a fatal 777 accident is 99.3%. By comparison, you only have a 0.3% chance of surviving a fatal Airbus 330 accident.
-FlyingFalap
|
|
|
Man that's creepy. Never rode on Asiana Airlines, but I flew round trip to Korea and San Francisco twice last year.
I'm going back to Korea in September for another round trip, but I'll be arriving in Dallas this time instead. Never know when the plane is going to give out on you. 
|
On July 07 2013 15:30 Silentness wrote:Never know when the plane is going to give out on you.
At least you can feel much safer than taking a car, ship, train, bicycle, motorcycle, bus, submarine or just about any other form of transportation. It is statistically extremely safe to fly on a commercial airline.
edit: Out of 34,434 transportation fatalities in the US in 2011, exactly 0 were killed in an airline accident.
source: http://www.ntsb.gov/data/img/pie_chart.jpg
-FlyingFalap
|
On July 07 2013 14:54 ilikeredheads wrote:man......you are lucky to be alive after your plane just crash landed = Perfect time to take a picture..................-__-;
Anyone else shocked to see them with their hand luggage. If a plane has crashed and is on fire, please for the love of god just get out ASAP.
I can't help but wonder the extra time wasted from people pushing around trying to get their overhead compartment luggage out.
|
I am shocked. It's pretty disgusting, or as ExceeD_DreaM put it, very greedy/selfish. I wonder if those two people died of smoke inhalation from being stuck inside for too long behind people stopping to get their luggage.
-FlyingFalap
|
On July 07 2013 15:52 fearus wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2013 14:54 ilikeredheads wrote:man......you are lucky to be alive after your plane just crash landed = Perfect time to take a picture..................-__-; Anyone else shocked to see them with their hand luggage. If a plane has crashed and is on fire, please for the love of god just get out ASAP. I can't help but wonder the extra time wasted from people pushing around trying to get their overhead compartment luggage out.
Yeah honestly they're fucking idiots. Get the hell off the plane and get the luggage later if possible.
Same thing in a house fire. Are you going to go box all your shit and take it out while inhaling smoke?
The only thing I got going in my mind was that those two women were stubborn idiots that didn't realize the severity of the incident.
|
On July 07 2013 16:02 Silentness wrote:
Get the hell off the plane and get the luggage later if possible.
This.
If the luggage was not destroyed in the accident, you will get it back eventually.
If the accident was likely to destroy the luggage, like here, where the top half of the fuselage was destroyed by fire,
YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS STOPPING TO OPEN THE FRIGGEN BINS!
GTFO, so everyone else can too.
-FlyingFalap
|
On July 07 2013 16:02 Silentness wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2013 15:52 fearus wrote:On July 07 2013 14:54 ilikeredheads wrote:man......you are lucky to be alive after your plane just crash landed = Perfect time to take a picture..................-__-; Anyone else shocked to see them with their hand luggage. If a plane has crashed and is on fire, please for the love of god just get out ASAP. I can't help but wonder the extra time wasted from people pushing around trying to get their overhead compartment luggage out. Yeah honestly they're fucking idiots. Get the hell off the plane and get the luggage later if possible. Same thing in a house fire. Are you going to go box all your shit and take it out while inhaling smoke? The only thing I got going in my mind was that those two women were stubborn idiots that didn't realize the severity of the incident.
House fire is a little different because there isn't a huge line of people bunching up to leave. Depending on how you assess it you will take some time to collect your pets, maybe a few heirlooms.
On July 07 2013 13:23 pRo9aMeR wrote:
I've thought before about landings like this where the tail hits something first before the landing gear. This is part of the reason I always try to get a seat closer to the front than the back of the plane. a little scary~
The rear cabin is statistically the most survivable part of a plane.
|
On July 07 2013 16:12 oBlade wrote:
The rear cabin is statistically the most survivable part of a plane.
You have a large crumple zone in front of you when the plane crashes nose first (more often than not). Nothing wrong with the back of the plane, it's usually less crowded plus you have two emergency exits right behind you if the shit does hit the fan.
|
On July 07 2013 16:08 FlyingFalap wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2013 16:02 Silentness wrote:
Get the hell off the plane and get the luggage later if possible. This. If the luggage was not destroyed in the accident, you will get it back eventually. If the accident was likely to destroy the luggage, like here, where the top half of the fuselage was destroyed by fire, YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS STOPPING TO OPEN THE FRIGGEN BINS! GTFO, so everyone else can too. -FlyingFalap
Not to mention they have the type of carry on luggage that's awkward to carry on the aisles without hitting the seats and whatnot, slowing the entire line of people from exiting.
|
I would probably get my luggage too. I dont understand the bitching at all. I would scared as hell and would not know how I act. Probably just grab my stuff and get out, not realizing what has just happend.
Is there ANY rumor about someone getting hurt by the ones who secured their bags? I guess not.
I would like to know why the top of the plane burned down ??!? For my understanding, it landed without landinggear, spun around, lost it´s tail, but never was upside down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://o.twimg.com/1/proxy.jpg?t=FQQVBhhbaHR0cHM6Ly9wYXRoYWthY2RuLWEuYWthbWFpaGQubmV0L3Bob3RvczIvZjM2YTU3MjktNmRiNy00MGRiLTljOTgtOTlhYThiNjhkZjRjL29yaWdpbmFsLmpwZxQEFgASAA&s=8BVIqFcDHI88uJA9Ws6EtnVWmMFQrt8wWB22Hnnwtok)
