next »

[baka_janai]

I ran across these two sites today and thought they'd be appropriate here.  The first in a movie on APOD tracking flyings over the US.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0804/flightpatterns_koblin.mov

And the second one busts the myth that "flying is safer than driving."  Well, no.  It's not.  One hour on the road is, in fact, safer than one hour in the air.  But then the three hours to fly to NY is indeed safer than the tens of hours it would take to drive to NY.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0DE5D81730F937A15752C1A962958260

[baka_janai]

It also seems to bust the myth of "flyover country."

[socsci]

According to David Cay Johnston (Pulitzer-winning NYT reporter) in Free Lunch, flying is safer than train travel. I had always thought the opposite. Interesting book.

[wiseprof06]

Time spent in an airplane on a commercial flight is not equal. The takeoff and landing phases are more dangerous than cruising along at 32,000 feet. Driving dangers do depend strongly on time and distance traveled. The premise of the argument is wrong. The idea of commercial flying being safer than driving is not a myth.

[prytania3]

Time spent in an airplane on a commercial flight is not equal. The takeoff and landing phases are more dangerous than cruising along at 32,000 feet. Driving dangers do depend strongly on time and distance traveled. The premise of the argument is wrong. The idea of commercial flying being safer than driving is not a myth.

That's the lousy thing about no smoking rules on airplanes. When the smoking light went off, you knew you were safe. When it came back on, you knew you were entering the most dangerous part of the trip.