Ha Ha Ha

Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2003
Posts
13,608
Location
Back with a Vengeance.
Relentless said:
You just reminded me of some huge guy in the lifts from the car park in the Bullring.

I was out with my girlfriend, about 3 others in the lift and when we all got out I honestly think all 5 of us exhaled in relief!!!
well in the last year or so i've noticed that the media have been making a big deal about the increasing obesity in the UK/US and the knock-on effects this may have.
this could be the thin end of the wedge.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
20,324
Location
Äkäslompolo
The_Dark_Side said:
bottom line? as it stands you made a claim which you cannot backup.
should you provide more evidence than the "because i said so and i'm better than you" that you've posted thus far then i will be the first to say how wrong i was ( i'm neither qualified in the field we're discussing nor infallible).
You really don't 'get' me, do you? Watch me from now on young padewan, you might learn a thing or two about wit.
 
Associate
Joined
11 Apr 2006
Posts
1,858
Location
London
The_Dark_Side said:
well if that's your honest opinion then fair enough.
i disagree and, while i've noticed one or two members posting the same doubts as i have

Read his post:

Scuzi said:
The fact remains that it is entirely possible for a 30 stone man to kill everyone in the cabin of an aircraft in the event of massive acceleration in various directions. Likely? Not really but it is possible.

He is saying there is a possibility, albeit it a slim one, but still a chance it could happen. So you're arguing that it would be impossible?

The_Dark_Side said:
i haven't noticed anyone agreeing with you

Gonna have to agree with Scuzi on this one.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2003
Posts
13,608
Location
Back with a Vengeance.
The Pat said:
He is saying there is a possibility, albeit it a slim one, but still a chance it could happen. So you're arguing that it would be impossible?.
i'd have to say that for all intents and purposes i do think it's impossible...in as much as the odds against it happening would be absolutely astronomical. when a chance becomes so slim it's discounted as a possibility. if you want to take things to the nth degree then everything is mathmatically possible. odds are always xxx to one after all but when that xxx is a gigantic number then in the real world its regarded as impossible.
given enough time you could postulate a tenuous scenario describing how a cheesy wotsit could bring down an airliner, but you don't see them banned on flights do you?
 
Associate
Joined
11 Apr 2006
Posts
1,858
Location
London
The_Dark_Side said:
if you want to take things to the nth degree

Like you did. Scuzi merely stated it could happen and you created a big thing out of it.

The_Dark_Side said:
given enough time you could postulate a tenuous scenario describing how a cheesy wotsit could bring down an airliner, but you don't see them banned on flights do you?

To be fair he was likely not allowed to fly on the odds of him hurting at least one person. Very significantly more likely to happen than your scenario.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2003
Posts
13,608
Location
Back with a Vengeance.
Scuzi said:
Relax Sally, it's only the internet :cool:
dammit sweet pants will you stop it.
The Pat said:
Like you did. Scuzi merely stated it could happen and you created a big thing out of it.
no, i think you'll find that we started small and ended up big.
try re-reading from the start....i'll be asking questions at the end of the lesson.
The Pat said:
To be fair he was likely not allowed to fly on the odds of him hurting at least one person. Very significantly more likely to happen than your scenario.
which is true, and also something i've said from the start of this disagreement.
read post#25, my second contribution in this thread.
 
Associate
Joined
6 Jan 2003
Posts
736
My god, it amazes me that in one post it's all about how bad those nasty men are for preaching hate against homosexuals, yet here you all are doing the same against overweight people.

Pathetic.


Oh and btw, yes I am overweight, yes it is my fault, and yes I am on a diet and going to the gym to do something about it. I gave up smoking 11 months ago and now i'm trying to do this, it's not easy, in fact it's harder than giving up smoking was!.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
9 May 2005
Posts
31,711
Location
Cambridge
Spie said:
I think Mr Scuzi knows a hell of a lot about this than the rest of us put together.

Does he hell, he works in ATC. Thats like saying a traffic warden knows about driving a car. :p or impact damage due to crashing.

A glorified plane spotter.

That said people can't see they are having their leg pulled.
 
Permabanned
Joined
21 Apr 2004
Posts
13,312
Location
Wolverhampton
It's fat peoples' excuses that crack me up.

"Everything tastes good." - Not salad though, obviously.
"It's glandular" - It's greed and laziness. Sorry to break it to you.
"My Dad was fat, I get it from him" - You got all of your Dad's fat transferred into your body? "No but.." Was you born fat? "No but.." What's that in your hand? "Deep fried chicke.... chick peas."
 
Permabanned
Joined
21 Apr 2004
Posts
13,312
Location
Wolverhampton
Spie said:
I think Mr Scuzi knows a hell of a lot about this than the rest of us put together.

I don't think by being an Air Traffic Controller do you become the fountain of all knowledge when it comes to planes. He'll know a good chunk, but nothing more than standard research or study can tell you, no?

When it comes to ATC work though, I'm sure his wealth of experience and personal hands-on knowledge would trump anybody's vague research here.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
16,487
Location
Shakespeare’s County
Why would a high weight man be any different to someone sitting in the 95th percentile when your talking about what happens in a typical aviation crash.

Pretty much all pax will die anyway. The only issue with the extra weight is seat belt anchors tearing out and seats collapsing, something thats pretty commonly with all types of passengers if the loads are of sufficient local intensity. Aircraft have no real crashworthness criteria, if they did they would be too heavy to fly.

Im confused why an ATC has some sort of extra insight into aircraft structures than anyone else in the street in a professional training sense. Most the stuff here will be formed from dinner round a table and chatting with friends than any particular course. There no need to learn about crash dynamics when your job is to prevent that. As an Aerospace Engineer Id like to think i understand this to a high level, Im purplexed by Spie's comment, it has no foundation. But these posts here to seem very out of character for the two main contributors so its some wind up yeah? Or a bad start to the week for someone :eek:
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
9 May 2005
Posts
31,711
Location
Cambridge
Jonnycoupe said:
Pretty much all pax will die anyway. The only issue with the extra weight is seat belt anchors tearing out and seats collapsing, something thats pretty commonly with all types of passengers if the loads are of sufficient local intensity. Aircraft have no real crashworthness criteria, if they did they would be too heavy to fly.:

Exactly the seats would rip out of the tracks or the tracks and beams snap. Chances are if you survived your legs would be cut off anyway. Atleast fat man then loses some weight ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom