this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024
278 points (99.6% liked)

People Twitter

5182 readers
1697 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mvirts@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Na you can only do that in an airbus

[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 13 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

Weight repartition and balance is extremely important in an aircraft. If everyone moved to one end of the aircraft it could cause loss of control and crash

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 15 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Skill issue. Pilots need to learn to think on their feet.

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Why can't they stay sitting?

Then they can't see over the console. Surely you noticed there aren't any seats, right?

[–] Steamymoomilk@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 hour ago

DO A BARREL ROLL!

[–] ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Simple solution is to pack enough people in that they can't move like that

[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Ya, maybe like on seats with, dunno, belts?

[–] ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Sounds space inefficient just add more people instead

Can confirm, seats are big and heavy, that's valuable people space.

Also, remove the luggage storage for more people weight capacity.

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 17 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

How about just bunk beds with seat belts or some kind of restraint and a paddled ceiling inside your bed space.

The next dumb thing to having an completely open floor space is in installing seats and normalizing the idea that people should sit in them for 8, 10, 12, 14 hours periods.

The only time we need seats with restraints is in the ten minutes after take off and the ten minutes when landing .... the rest of the time, I would prefer if I just slept the entire time.

I'd give up TV, a monitor, music, a window, free food and drinks if airlines just gave me a bare bones option of just being allowed to sleep flat for the entire flight.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 7 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

They have that on routes to Floston Paradise.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

I unironically think this is how plane travel should be. Slide me into a tube and gas me asleep. No peanuts, no crick neck, no risk of hijacking, and no praying and screaming when we slam into a mountain at 900km/h because the pilots had a bad day.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 9 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

That's a thing already and it is called first class.

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 hours ago

Could never afford it ... my point was ... I'd pay regular fare to be able to lie flat for the entire flight and you can forget giving me a TV monitor, entertainment, free food, just give me water, don't even bother with a blanket or pillow .... you can even stack me with three or four other bunks above or below me ... I don't even want a window ... I don't want to interact with your staff and I really don't want to have anything to do with anyone or bother with anyone for the entire flight ... just let me sleep in peace for eight hours, it's cheap and I really don't care or want any extras.

[–] atocci@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

And you still get all the other stuff, so the only thing you have to give up is a lot of money

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

There are several ways they could do stacked beds or offset-stacked reclined seats that would not only be more comfortable and provide more room for the passengers, but also allow them to cram more people in the plane.

[–] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 24 points 5 hours ago (4 children)

They should fly up as high as possible and take a nose dive, then repeat the process. Let's call it Floating Xperience.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 hours ago

That’s part of astronaut training, they call it the vomit comet.

[–] SGforce@lemmy.ca 15 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

It's Boeing, they do that anyway.

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 hours ago

Not the repeating part

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 5 points 4 hours ago

The Vomit Comet exists.

[–] LostXOR@fedia.io 1 points 4 hours ago

That's basically what parabolic flights for simulating low or no gravity are.

[–] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 27 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (2 children)

Fewer parts = fewer parts that can fail.

Boeing should look into this.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 3 points 3 hours ago

Too bad they’re not having problems when the interior parts fail.

[–] TheOctonaut@mander.xyz 1 points 2 hours ago
[–] ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 16 points 5 hours ago

Then everyone decides to look out the left windows at the grand canyon.

And then slowly shifts to the back of the plane because they want to see it longer.

Soon they'll see it up close.

[–] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago

I want hammocks like a man o' war.

Stack em three high and still have some legroom.

[–] QuantumSparkles@sh.itjust.works 10 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Damn that would be dope if it was stable enough. So Star Trek. Just needs a bar run by Whoopi Goldberg

[–] The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago

If your vessel's bartender has eyebrows and doesn't wear a cool hat, something has gone wrong.

[–] Damage@feddit.it 1 points 4 hours ago

Yeah, very Enterprise-D

[–] SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

That interior instantly made me think of lazy town

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)
[–] veroxii@aussie.zone 1 points 13 minutes ago

Knew what it was before I even clicked. You sir are an internet historian.

[–] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

They could at least set up a kid corral somewhere, let the little shots wear themselves out.

[–] pinkystew@reddthat.com 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Just eject them at maximum altitude

Abortion isn't legal but human rights violations aren't really being punished right now

And depending on where you're going, it would likely happen in international airspace.

[–] Ifeelya@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/may/01/747-cargo-plane-crash-bagram-airbase-video

I know this is a shitpost, but in case anyone is curious this link has a video of what can happen if a plane has unsecured weight onboard that is allowed to move around.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

And here's the Wikipedia page about the incident, which has more details:

On 29 April 2013, the Boeing 747-400 operating the flight crashed within the perimeter of the Bagram airfield moments after taking off, killing all seven people on board.

The subsequent investigation concluded that improperly secured cargo broke free during the take-off and rolled to the back of the cargo hold, crashing through the rear pressure bulkhead and disabling the rear flight control systems. This rendered the aircraft stuck in an uncontrollable pitch-up attitude and induced a stall, and made recovery by the pilots impossible.

So it's not just unsecured cargo, but unsecured cargo that disabled rear flight control systems. I'm guessing unsecured people wouldn't cause the same problem, but it could certainly cause other problems.

[–] veroxii@aussie.zone 1 points 11 minutes ago

Yeah people are squishier than the fuselage.

[–] Sergio@slrpnk.net 4 points 5 hours ago

Line dance during take-off: "now sliiiiide to the back!"