Originally Posted by
GreatChecko
No, I fly them. But that's not relevant to this conversation. Did you come here to just post rhetorical questions or just ignore what we are saying? Your pointless ramblings are making me tired.
So how could an aircraft be designed to prevent serious injury when someone chooses not to wear their seatbelt? Even airbags are be fatal when someone is not wearing their seatbelt in a car accident. Stupidity cannot be engineered out of a system.
Aircraft interiors are already designed to be lightweight and very minimal. Adding additional padding to prevent someone from getting hurt when they already choose to not wear the seat belt, would just add weight with little benefit. Furthermore, the forces in a turbulence incident are much more random than a vehicle collision.
Again, unless one makes the entire cabin frangible or a huge padded room, I cannot think of a way to prevent serious injury when someone chooses to bypass the main safety system, the seatbelt and the seat.
Checko
Go google automobile safety and you'll learn an awful lot. It's not padding, it's different material. It's not weight, it's choosing the proper material.
Here's the deal: You know nothing about the subject. It annoys you greatly that there is obviously an area of an aircraft that has been overlooked in design safety and god forbid a mere "pax" point that out to you.
I can show you PBS specials, documentaries, and whole libraries dedicated to automobile safety involving the passenger compartment. We know how much force is created by the secondary collisions in an automobile - however no one can tell me how much force a turbulent drop causes when a body comes into contact with the ceiling.