Hacker News Reader

Comment by michaelt | Hacker News Reader

> This might cover say half of one's laptop, which no matter how stupid it sounds, makes taking your luggage with you the only financially sensible choice in a crash (unless you have insurance).

If there's no smoke, no visible flames, and you can do so safely without obstructing other passengers' egress? I can see the argument, sure.

Obviously if the cabin is filling with smoke or there are visible flames or other obvious dangers, the financially sensible choice is to evacuate ASAP as funerals often cost more than laptops.

View on HN

> If there's no smoke, no visible flames, and you can do so safely without obstructing other passengers' egress? I can see the argument, sure.

While there are no smoke/flames now or initially, that doesn't mean they won't appear "soon": planes have been completely engulfed with-in 90 seconds.

I don't think a stressed rando inside the plane is in position to evaluate how soon it will combust. Not even the firemen on the outside often have a clue.

Eh, I'd defer to them over some rando on the internet who's only seen a video that shows a short snippet of what went on.

The best anyone here can do is screech about not following the default suggested practice of leaving the luggage but the person who took the bag was actually there. Perhaps they had to pick it up because it was on the floor (ceiling) in their way. Not much harm in carrying it if it's something that small anyway.

I’ve read a few of these in depth crash analyses: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/

I’ve realized that fires are a way bigger issue than you might imagine after a crash — things can go south really quickly. Multiple stories of planes going from “fire outside” to “people suffocating and burning to death in their seats” in minutes. Here’s one of a 737 in Manchester, taxied of the runway intact, 55 people died: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/fire-on-the-runway-the-m...

I might have taken my laptop bag in such a case out of habit before reading these stories, not so much now.

I'm not arguing it's right. Frankly, I think it's stupid the way things are. But I can understand why some people make such choice.

I guess my argument mainly is that people who take their luggage are not stupid, instead their behavior may be highly rational, however we have the means to change it with by making such choice irrational and I wish we will.

> people who take their luggage are not stupid

I agree with your parent’s post explaining its a sensible financial choice. However as you noted there’s other things One could consider like other’s passagers survival chances or firefighter taking dangerous steps during their work.

Taking your language is financially sensible but socially dumb and selfish. It seems an acceptable choices in the countries that values individual liberties and financial independence, but the other half of the world look very bad at that behavior.

If people's response to COVID didn't convince us that selfishness has taken over the world, I don't know what will.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com