Plane Crash In San Fran

[Anthony]

Asiana flight from Seoul. Witnesses actually said the tail hit the ground first and the plane cartwheeled before landing in a ball of fire.

[Birdwatcher]

Looks pretty good for bursting into a ball of fire

http://news.yahoo.com/faa-airliner-c...191557356.html

Not even sure if anyone died yet...tragic, but not quite catastrophic if everyone survives...hope so

[IronEagle]

Terrible, but it appears the exit chutes deployed and a lot of people escaped.

This is why you shouldn't f*ck around with a laptop computer, iPad, or cell phone during takeoff and landing. I know a lot of people can't resist putting them down for a moment but it's a small inconvenience for safety. Is it really too much to ask to stow them for a few minutes rather than run the risk of having them get in the way and/or fly around the cabin in an emergency?

A lot of people have been agitating for removing that restriction, but if it ever happens the restriction should still apply to those in exit rows.

[IronEagle]

http://news.yahoo.com/faa-airliner-c...191557356.html

Not even sure if anyone died yet...tragic, but not quite catastrophic if everyone survives...hope so

I am not confident everybody got off that plane safely.

[Anthony]

It would be a miracle especially from those sitting in the very back of the plane.

I am not confident everybody got off that plane safely.

[Anthony]

These You Tube videos do not paint a pretty picture. Sad......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8BnmbJWO4w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7HFN-9gtIM

[1960]

Another crash caused bt an Asian driver.

Asian pilots are awful. Also 777 pilots get the least amount of take off and landings because the flights are so long and the usually carry two crews. So at least two pilots every flight don't get a take off or landings. All of this being said this same crash happened to a British Airways flight a few years back that was caused by icing in the fuel.

[JuTMSY4]

http://mashable.com/2013/06/21/phones-takoff-landing/

I'm guessing you already know about this, but are you talking about distractions or something else?

[IronEagle]

http://mashable.com/2013/06/21/phones-takoff-landing/

I'm guessing you already know about this, but are you talking about distractions or something else?

I believe distractions ARE the reason for the restrictions. Not to mention you want heavy bricks like cellphones, tablets, etc. stowed in the event of a collision upon takeoff or landing.

I believe the potential for electronic interference with the avionics has been discounted, or mitigated at this point.

I like fly to places... I think the ease to get to places via avaition is probably the most major advancement over the last century. I'll put telecommunications/internet down as second most major.

Having said all this, I don't like the flying experience so much these days. I like to sit in the exit row. If you are ever on a flight with me, I'll be ready to go if necessary in case of emergency. Some others you fly with probably aren't the same.

[JuTMSY4]

I believe distractions ARE the reason for the restrictions. Not to mention you want heavy bricks like cellphones, tablets, etc. stowed in the event of a collision upon takeoff or landing.

I'll buy that - I've always been under the impression it had to do with interference issues (because they always say power down or similar).

Of course, if the FAA allows it, it'll take one good accident to make your scenario the rule by airline if not the FAA.

[IronEagle]

I'll buy that - I've always been under the impression it had to do with interference issues (because they always say power down or similar).

Of course, if the FAA allows it, it'll take one good accident to make your scenario the rule by airline if not the FAA.

I think originally that was the reason... there was a legitimate concern that electronic devices were interfering with the avionics. But now I don't think that is the case. The electronic devices are more advanced now and they have figured out how to shield the avionics from any issues.

If that were still the case I think you would see much heavier policing of the regulation.

At this point I think it's more about overall safety and awareness during takeoff and landing. Most dangerous times of the flight... it makes sense you want people to be aware in case they need to get out of the aircraft quickly. Otherwise why go through the safety instructions?

[KenfromCanada]

It would be a miracle especially from those sitting in the very back of the plane.

2 dead 69 injured reported at this point.

[Riccardo]

yeah

Obviously not concrete evidence but the mythbusters debunked the electronic interference angle

[3rd & Inches]

2 dead 69 injured reported at this point.

I think there is one unaccounted for. Amazing that only 2 are dead.

[royal]

Obviously not concrete evidence but the mythbusters debunked the electronic interference angle

I thought I remember hearing that was a myth as well. Forgot where though. Maybe it was that show.