How flying messes with the mind
bbc.com
bbc.com
My flying tips:
1. Travel with someone who also enjoys traveling.
2. Be well rested.
3. Drink tons of water the day/evening before so you are well hydrated.
4. Chapstick and hand lotion.
5. Bring your own entertainment, like downloaded Netflix shows.
6. Bring your own snacks.
7. Research the airports you'll need to navigate ahead of time so you don't stress yourself out.
8. Study the ground features as you take off and land. There are beautiful differences and unexpected sights you'll notice when looking for them, even in your home town.
9. Don't drink the alcohol, even when it's free.
Of course, if you are afraid of dying, heights, or falling I doubt any of these tips will help you.
My experiences are on short US flights from/to Orlando, so planes are generally filled with cheerful Disney-going people. This study was done by Europeans, presumably accustomed to European flights, whose "economy class" flights are pretty uncomfortable and bleak, at least from my very limited experience flying around Europe.
Counter-argument: If I eat at the airport, I'm cutting into useful time either at home or at my destination. On the plane, I've got nothing to do but kill time anyway.
In practice, I pad time before my flight to deal with traffic and security hiccups. When things go smoothly, that usually leaves me enough time to eat before the flight, so I do that. Sometimes I'll buy food at the airport and carry it on, though I try to avoid that since my fellow passengers might not appreciate the aroma.
Once I reach my destination, the last thing in the world I want to do is hang out in the airport longer. I'd much rather stop at a restaurant on the drive to wherever I'm going.
Re: "I never see meals on planes during domestic travel really": You'll get food (complementary in first, for purchase in main) if your flight is over 2 hour long AND you're not flying a regional jet (which you don't want to do for more than an hour anyway).
I have no experience flying in the USA, but it thought it would be the other way due to the seemingly massive amount of people complaining about seating.
Maybe it's because of the obesity rate.
That being said, perhaps a better comparison would be Ryanair vs Spirit, but American budget airlines are still pretty limited in routes and aren't nearly as entrenched as their European counterparts.
That's an unfair comparison.
If you want to compare major airlines, compare Delta, United, Southwest to AirFrance, Lufthansa, Virgin. For budget airlines, compare Ryanair & EasyJet to Spirit.
The differences are much less pronounced.
[1] http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-4195350/P...
I don't love any of the airlines, but the euro-budget are the worst and subsidized Asia/Arabian are the most comfortable. Southwest is in the middle, but typical coach comfort for the US.
Of course, that's just my anecdotal experience and I guess it varies based on subjective preferences.
I am comparing Delta etc. to Lufthansa etc., and Spirit etc. to EasyJet etc.
I also often have a single drink near the start of a flight.
I do think for some people who can use alcohol to be more relaxed it could be a good thing. Though I'd be cautious about drinking if I were already anxious about flying, since the cognitive effects of alcohol + low oxygen might not be what'd be expected... not to mention the turbulence, babies, and smelly feet I'd already have to deal with.
Some strangers I’ve previously sat next to: a retired nurse flying to take care of her mother in law who had dementia; a radiologist who had previously been a physicist at fermilab returning from an MRI conference; a bar tender/stripper; an evangelical who hosted asian exchange students; a heart surgeon who specialized in ablasions for treating a-fib; a 60’ish year-old man flying for his first time; a nanny/aupair; a Jewish grad student from Cape Town.
The flights pass so much more quickly when you’re engaged in conversation, and it’s pretty easy to get most people talking. Two of those passengers mentioned above I ended up in a car with. I gave the evangelical a ride to his hotel since it was on the way home from the airport for me. And with the radiologist we missed our connecting flight and rented a car together to drive the last 150 miles.
My favorite part is the plethora of entertainment options these days, catching up on all the movies, which seems to be the more common thing people opt to do.
I've been on a lot of flights over the past several years and what you describe seems to be a serious outlier.
Strangers trying to talk to me for the next X hours is one of the worst things that can happen on a flight for me.
Even if they do respect my wishes and dont try and talk to me (doesn't always happen), you then have the remaining 10h 59m of the flight to sit awkwardly knowing that you've both managed to annoy each other for trying to instigate something for your own selfish reasons that the other person doesn't want (i.e. you want to talk and they dont, or you dont want to talk and they do - no one wins).
Or worse if you dont manage to stop the conversation attempt early, you end up talking to someone for the better part of 10 or 11 hours just out of politeness and all that work/reading/sleep/coding you wanted to get done are lost while someone drones on and on about their garden or their last trip to <destination>
Please - only start conversations if you're really sure the other person is interested in talking to you! Particularly on long-haul flights!
YMMV I guess - I suppose on short-haul (<1.5 hours) it would be ok, but please please please never do this on long flights! :-)
The pretty girl who struck up a conversation with me on the leg from Minneapolis to Regina, SK was a large part of the reason I decided to move to Minnesota. Single, introverted me decided that if women in MN were as attractive and outgoing as her, it should be a nice place to live.
She turned out to be Canadian, but I moved to Minnesota anyway. Still loving it 20 years later!
I absolutely despise being spoken to when I'm on a plane (usually because I'm taking early morning flights and am utterly exhausted). Just keep in mind many people reallllly don't want to talk to anyone, so if they are curt or not very talkative don't take it personally. Some people just don't like talking to strangers.
So, just be aware that some people are just friendly and will keep talking to you because it's polite, but they will still show signs that they're done, like: looking out the window for a while, only responding with head-nods and "mhmm"s, pulling a laptop or tablet out, putting in noise-cancelling headphones, sleeping.
For me it's the opposite. I always liked flying, but airport bars and in-flight drinks took the cake. A lot of these are personal preferences one has to figure out.
For example, to No. 8, I've learned I cannot do red eyes over land, particularly if I'm window. I get distracted by the speckles of passing cities, fantasizing about my 737 being a superluminal spacecraft, and refuse to fall asleep.
Or, to seating. I like watching the ailerons and gentle wobble of the wing and plane, as the plane rises, slows down from its fight with gravity, loses lift, falls, thereby gaining velocity before stabilizing and rising again. Or as the plane gently arcs, side to side, by enormous distances that you can't feel but will observe if you look carefully. Consequently, exit rows--from which the wing occludes one's view--bore me. (Which is a plus if I plan on getting work done.)
Most of my flights are longer duration, US->EU and back.
Why? Air drinks are best drinks!
> Of course, if you are afraid of dying, heights, or falling I doubt any of these tips will help you.
But there is one thing that absolutely does: doing a discovery flight. In a disco flight, you'll fly with a pilot and be given permission to operate some very basic controls (taxiing on the runway, turns mid-air, the beginning of the landing approach). You'll learn how safe flying is. It's a great experience for those that are terrified of flying.
The next best thing is an air tour, since they are usually flown with the same small plane (Cessna 152).
Another thing that's helped me make flying extremely enjoyable is listening to ATC communications while on the ground (and during takeoff/landing if flying with Southwest). Taxiing up to the runway in a major airport is quite dramatic, and the bigger airports usually have small surprises that make it enjoyable (today, for example, I heard, then saw, that the President of Korea and probably Japan were in our same line).
SOURCE: flying every week for the last 1.5 years
I'm mild-mannered, low key, and non-claustrophobic and even I get stir crazy being cooped up in a plane after a while.
I do CO2 and O2 training tables for training longer breath holds. [1] I sometimes do these while playing Overwatch. I have noticed that I play like an absolute idiot while I am on a breath hold. I just end up making really tiny mistakes that I wouldn't normally, or running into situations that I shouldn't have.
1. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=gix.apneatrain...
Also, I used to get pretty severe effects from altitude whenever I'd go above about 10k elevation. But since I've trained apnea, the headaches, nausea and general crabbiness haven't happened and I've even been able to go for ~5 mi jogs. So I'm curious whether people who've trained in apnea would be somewhat resistant to the effects of flying just because our training has pushed us so far beyond the effects of flying that our bodies are accustomed to it. Of course it's also possible that we'd still be feeling the effects and just have a blind spot to it because we're more used to noticing the end stages of oxygen deprivation.
I've read that it's around 50% saturation that you're in danger of passing out, and most oximeters are only accurate to 70%. I've gotten no where close to those numbers though, so it's likely just lack of CO2 tolerance.
But there's just so much that contributes to being near blackout that isn't oxygen saturation that you're better off learning to recognize the subtle physiological cues. For example, you can blackout earlier (higher measurable O2 saturation) if you inhale too deeply. It may seem counterintuitive, but expanding your lungs more fully can increase pressure on the heart and make it harder for it to distribute the blood to your body and brain. Your blackout O2 saturation will also differ depending on how much gravity your heart is having to deal with. Standing, sitting and lying down will have different blackout O2 saturations and that's only considering dry training...in water, both swimming position and depth/pressure will factor in too.
So when I'm doing a hold, the main things I pay attention to are first diaphragm (first contractions, for me, are pretty reliably at 1/3-1/2 of a max hold), and then the feeling in my fingers/toes, but you'll start to notice a couple of other sensations as well if you start pushing yourself to the brink. Incidentally, you can be pretty sure if CO2 tolerance is your limiting factor if your first contractions come in the second half of your hold.
Expect to fall asleep as soon as you are on the plane, eat before boarding and avoid coffee. I could never do it until I could. Now I start yawning at the gate.
For those that lack belief, Valium or Xanax should do the trick too.
I don't fly international often enough to worry about getting hooked, so 2 pills (one to sleep on the plane and one to force myself to sleep at the right time once I reach my destination) have always made jet lag a easy for me.
Valerian root works pretty well (especially with a small nip) and there are some other lighter options like melatonin. Also sugar pills :)
Doctors here don't give you Xanax unless you're having panic attacks.
Passing out before take off and waking up after landing would be a DREAM for me! I usually am forced to take 3 benadryl and hope for the best.
There's a reason I haven't flown since 2012 :)
EDIT: Benadryl = diphenhydramine, which is cheap, non-prescription, and usually acts within 25 minutes. Enough of it can put you out even after you just napped.
"You are less likely to be in an accident in a plane than in a car".
The above is a true statistic, but more nuance is required.
Firstly, the most dangerous situation is driving on a two lane, no barrier highway. This results in head on collisions, which often results in death.
If you can avoid that situaion, you are already doing better than most.
Additionally, you can control the type of vehicle you are in. A Miata is a deadly vehicle. A large modern SUV is safer.
Lastly, when something goes wrong on a plane, it goes /really wrong/. Hijacked = dead. Pilot error = dead. Fire = dead.
I don't to be killed or burned or maimed in a plane crash. I don't care if that means I have to drive a large, safe vehicle or avoid traveling in certain situations.
It is an idiosyncratic bias of mine, but it is an unnecessary game of russian roulette that has low, but uncontrolable risk.
Opting out is the safest choice I can make, per my estimation.
Lastly, humans have a low chance of dying in a warzone.
But Syrians have a higher chance.
Avoid being in a war zone. Statistics are your friend, averages are not.
Really, as a rational person, you should be scared by the road more than by any other type of transportation. It's just that all those deaths are scattered across the time axis, while for planes and trains, more deaths happen at once, which is "better" for media coverage.
However, while ISS space station also has a great safety record per mile that does not make it safe. Which is why frequent flyers have high lifetime risks even if you call it 'safe'. ~X deaths per billion miles sounds great until you notice people with 10+ million miles.
Flying promotes more long trips making fatalities per mile meaningless.
Further, highway miles while sober have very different safety numbers. Making the short vs long trip comparison even more different.
A chart/graph that compares the impact on accident likeliness of various safety reducing things about driving and quantifies them relative to "beers on an empty highway" would be interesting.
It would also anger a lot of people who condemn drunk driving while doing various dangerous things themselves.
Someone should make that chart.
Yes, and trip length is pretty much the only metric that matters as airplanes are faster than everything else. Since planes are so fast, the only thing I "value" when flying is how far I get.
>However, while ISS space station also has a great safety record per mile that does not make it safe.
For the ISS we don't care about distance though. We care about duration. People aboard the ISS are not travelers.
People allocate travel by time, mostly.
Statistics are your friend.
An additional 47 were seriously injured.
The remaining 120+ people had "minor injuries", which, because the plane erupted into flames, I assume had to do with smoke inhalation.
This can't seriously be considered a good outcome. The PTSD of nearly dying in a fire would personally be too much for me. Again, that is my bias.
Also, are hijackings being considered here? They are common enough, terrorist or not.
It would be cheeky to say that a hijacking is not an accident and therefore isn't included in the stats.
It would make sense, however, to avoid high crime areas, large and violent gatherings of people like riots, etc.
And if you were truly, truly, truly paranoid, you could wear a kevlar helmet around. People might think you are a complete freak, but war journalists do it.
My point here is, when I'm driving a car, I can control my personal risk.
With flying, most of the risk factors are completely out of my hands. I can only control the number of times I fly. And if they were legal, I could wear a parachute.
Yeah, if you never looked at the evidence or psychology then I suppose you would come to that conclusion.
> With flying, most of the risk factors are completely out of my hands.
Why do you think flying is so much safer than driving?
The aggregate statistics for road deaths and injuries include drunk drivers, high speed two way roads in Wyoming, winter collisions, etc.
I don't drive drunk. I don't drive on high speed two way roads. I don't live in a wintery place.
The aggregate statistics do not represent my driving habits. I am controlling my risk.
Re your second point, yes flying is safe. I don't dispute it. However, people /still die/ while flying. Ok, now why is that?
Planes are hijacked. Engines fail. Planes collide. Planes are shot down.
I can't control the situation once it occurs. I can only choose to not fly.
When I'm driving, I can choose my type of car. I can drive defensively. I can avoid certain roads.
You might think this is just an illusion of control, but how many people have died in a 25 mph crash in a very safe truck on side roads?
How many people have died on two lane roads at night with alcohol involved?
Which would help because...? Acrivastine doesn't really have any sedative effect at all. And taking three at once is quite an overdose.
no, but benadryl does. which is exactly what the op said, and op doesn't live in your country. in fact, most people don't live in your country.
But then I was worried that nobody would recognize its chemical name.
I'm also fortunate in that I know lots of people with planes. Plane ownership is fairly common in my area. One of my friends even has a timeshare, except it is for a plane and not a condo. I had no idea such things existed, but they do.
It really does improve the whole flying experience. The additional expense is worth it to avoid the TSA and not be treated like cattle. If I'm flying internationally, I'll just drive into Canada and fly out from there. That's how I used to get to go to Cuba, before it was legal.
You realize that flying charter is well out of reach for most, right?
Let me explain.
Let's take your example of flying first. If I booked a first-class ticket right now from DFW to ORD, it will likely cost me $2,000. My fiancee and I are going to Barcelona in a year (BCN), and I wanted us to fly first/business round-trip. Doing that without miles would have cost me >$20,000. Very few people can drop that on a flight. (It's also not worth it, but that's neither here nor there. You are better off booking at least a week in advance and buying upgrade tickets, since hardly anyone pays for first class outright anymore, which is why its a dying product.)
A similar charter flight on something like NetJets or any fractional broker would cost >$6,000/ticket in the domestic example and probably >$30,000-$50,000 for international travel. You can reduce that cost by knowing folks with jets (not many own one, given that they cost at least $30M, hangar, maintenance and fueling costs notwithstanding), but even then, it's an uneconomical proposition for most people.
With that, let's talk about the "hassle" that is TSA.
It's been a long time since I've waited more than 15 minutes in line for security. Most of my jaunts through these lines take 5-10 minutes, tops. How?
1) Sign up for Precheck. It's $89/5 years. It's very little money for a LOT of convenience.
2) Sign up for CLEAR. It's $139/year, but comes in handy in a BIG way at airports that have it. (The Precheck line at BWI on a Thursday is exceptionally large most of the time, but having CLEAR lets me cut it and save me at least 10 minutes.)
Admittedly, this only really works if you fly a lot.
3) If you know what to pack, you won't get stopped. TSA makes these guidelines very, very clear. The only time I've gotten stopped consistently was when I brought a bottle of Tend Skin that leaked all over my duffle (that I had to throw out). I got stopped today because I had three laptops on me and forgot to take one out, but getting through that took less than five minutes.
Also, I would imagine that unless you have your own jet and aren't Ubering it out, flying private has limitations of its own given that charter airlines don't have the capacity the bigger companies do, so you're beholden to hoping that you can get a flight out that day on the aircraft that you want.
Despite having said all of this, when I can afford it, I'll fly charter one of these days just to say I did it. However, I really enjoy the song and dance that is going through the airport at peak hours and airport food tastes good, most of the time.
Anyhow, I realize that it is probably out of reach for you, which is why I quantified it. If, for example, you and five of your friends would all be going first class, it's pretty close to the same costs as charter. It doesn't reach parity until about that level.
It also helps if you aim for regionals, instead of the larger airports. That may sound counter-intuitive, but that's where I've had best luck organizing a flight. You can do spur of the moment things, but that starts getting obscenely priced.
It also really, really helps to have friends with planes.
And, again, I know it isn't necessarily something you can do on a regular basis but it really does make a difference. I only charter if I'm staying in North America. There is no way I can justify the expense for long international flights. If it is an international flight, I live right on the border and have Canadian citizenship so it's pretty easy for me to fly out of Canada instead.
As for the TSA, I just really don't like them. I don't mind customs and I understand the need for border security. I find the security theater to be offensive, however. I'd probably not mind if they actually were really increasing security. Israel has a good model, follow them. Either way, it is nice to completely skip them.
Back to the idea of regionals... The smaller airports are much nicer to deal with. I often use a small airport in Augusta, Maine. They can land a two-engine jet there and there's always someone willing to make a few dollars, even if just to get more flight hours.
Another one is just a little tiny grass airfield. There's a small private one in Rangeley and there is a municipal one in Phillips. Those are pretty good if you're not in a big rush. Best of all, you get to know the pilots and they will probably even let you help fly the plane.
At any rate, I like your idea of treating yourself to a chartered flight. Even if you're never able to do it on a regular basis, it is worth it just to enjoy the flight. I don't really like flying all that much, though I do enjoy being allowed to pilot the planes. You don't need a license to do so, as there is a pilot right beside you. It's actually pretty easy to not bump into stuff.
Then, of course, there is the experience of a more costly charter, where you even have a stewardess, food, and drink. That gets really costly but it's worth it as a special treat. My usual charter isn't much more than a plane and a pilot, I will even typically be loading my own baggage. That's quite a bit different than chartering a 747 with a full crew. Note, that's not something I have ever done. I have a few bucks, but I'd prefer to not waste it.
So, yeah, treat yourself to the luxury sometime. There are varied levels of charter. It really helps to get to know some pilots personally. They make great friends and are all very enthusiastic about flying. They will try to pressure you into buying your own plane and getting a license. They are a very passionate bunch.
As for the Über plane thing, I was surprised to learn that they have timeshares for planes. One of my local friends has a timeshare plane and that has come in handy. It's much less expensive to just chip in and take a vacation with him and his family. I can take the missus and we pick all decide on a destination. That is actually not that expensive. It isn't always the same plane, or anything like that. They have airplanes all over and the timeshare is just on the one you want at that location and that is equivalent to a certain class of airplane. (I can get better details, if you're really curious.)
Anyhow, sorry for rambling but I'm tired and there is a lot to say on the subject. I do highly recommend you follow through on your idea to treat yourself at least once. You can probably hit up your regional and fly to a nearby city for just a few hundred dollars. Charter isn't always complete luxury.
I did two discovery flights and got to partially operate the plane both times. I absolutely can't wait to take lessons; I loved it.
This is inaccurate. SUVs have a vastly higher rollover rate compared to traditional sedans, and the Miata's handling is far superior.
When a collision between an SUV and Miata is imminent, the Miata driver can take evasive action while maintaining control of their car, but the SUV driver often loses control and rolls the vehicle over, with high risk of head injuries. What's worse, they may hit someone else while out of control and cause even more injury.
SUVs are dangerous to be in and dangerous to be around.
If I was in a miata, which is low to the ground AND has a low trunk, the truck would have killed me.
An SUV, while dangerous in some types of accidents, has plenty of metal between myself and whoever rear ends me.
Thanks for writing :)
Your Golf probably had decent performance too, but we are discussing your statement about the relative merits of a Miata versus a SUV and there's no comparison, safety-wise. The stats are very clear.
Most hijackings in aviation history haven't had catastrophic outcomes; the 9/11 attacks were an exception. Also they're incredibly unlikely on commercial flights in the post 9/11 aviation security atmosphere, at least in the US/Europe.
Pilot error, while a large statistical source of catastrophic accidents, is also mitigated by the fact that all commercial planes have at least 2 pilots and often more on longer flights. And there are plenty of mechanisms and procedures in place to ensure that a single pilot error is rarely catastrophic.
Fire in the sky, particularly above 10,000ft (3000m), yea you're probably dead. On the ground, it's hardly unsurvivable. If you avoid panic on the way down, get your shoes on, get in the brace position, and head towards an exit asap, you've got a good shot.
FWIW, I also used to be extremely flight-phobic. I still have a bit of anxiety flying, but I've been able to significantly assuage it through exposure therapy, by watching literally every episode of Air Crash Investigation (also know as Mayday) (they're all on youtube). When you understand the lengths the aviation industry goes to to unpack and understand the exact causes of every accident (catastrophic or otherwise, and even near-misses), you'll be somewhat reassured. For example, regarding pilot error, every time a new class of pilot error is exhibited in an accident, the NTSB and FAA ensure that the lessons from it are propagated throughout the industry. Procedures are changed, pilots are educated, devices are modified, regulations introduced, etc - whatever needs to be done is.
> "You are less likely to be in an accident in a plane than in a car".
> The above is a true statistic, but more nuance is required.
Regarding the "nuance": something I've never seen before, but would like to see, are these risk numbers adjusted for drivers that are not at-fault.
Example: If I have a reported N% likelihood of being killed in a drunk-driving incident, but never personally drive drunk, is my personal risk-exposure really N%? It seems like it would be lower.
My instinct is that these blanket-statement risk numbers may overstate risk for competent drivers. Not so on an airplane, however, where passengers have zero influence on how an event may play out.
Driving statistics are aggregates. Some statistics may not apply, for example if you don't drive drunk, or on very dangerous roads, or very fast, or in wintery conditions.
Have you read about "gun death" stats? 50% of gun deaths are murders. 50% are suicides.
Don't shoot yourself, and you have permanently lowered your risk of dying from a gun by 50%!
Similarly, if you were to carry a parachute on a plane, or drive an armored tank, you would permanently lower your chances of "dying from an air accident or car accident", regardless of your chances of being "in an accident".
So, since I can control for a ton of risk on the road, but can't control for any risk in the air, I will continue to travel by road.
Thanks for writing :)