Airline Lavatory Tips

by Willy Volk on

Over on the Poop Report, (“Your #1 Source, for Your #2 Business”), a flight attendant has provided several excellent airline lavatory tips. Though some of the tips seem, well, obvious (“Wear shoes”…I’m shuddering at the thought of the alternative), the tips are interesting, if not always feasible. In brief, she claims:

  • Do not touch anything.
  • Roll up long pants.
  • Not all lavs are created equal.
  • Time your washroom breaks carefully.
  • Use an unused pouch of coffee grounds — or full face masks — to prevent odors from attacking you.
  • Do not wait until the last minute to go.

These are reasonable, of course, though I have three more:

  1. Go before you board the plane.
  2. Stop playing in there.
  3. Wipe up the splashes after you make them.

[Via Jaunted; Photo: ACME-Nollmeyer]

Man Gets Off In Plane

by Neil Woodburn on

This might just be the most horrific airline story I’ve ever heard.

Apparently an off-duty employee of Northwest Airlines sat next to a woman during a flight from Seattle and proceeded to, um, engage his cockpit. The woman, who was trying to sleep at the time, wasn’t aware of what was happening until, um, his um, DC-10 disgorged its, um passengers on to her. Yuuuuuucccckkkk!!!!!

The offending passenger was met by police officers when the plane landed and has been charged with a misdemeanor. Once I hear news of him being beheaded, I might consider flying Northwest once again.

Why Do Pilots Say ‘Roger’?

by Willy Volk on

Even if you haven’t heard it in real life, I’m guessing you’ve heard a pilot on TV say “Roger.” I bet you’ve even heard pilots say “Roger Wilco.” Have you ever wondered who Roger Wilco is? And why pilots like to say his name?

According to The Straight Dope, in 1927 “Roger” was the word chosen to represent the letter “R,” which is, of course, the first letter in the word “received.” In other words, a pilot would receive instructions, and to indicate he had received them, he’d say “Roger.” Why didn’t he just say “received”? Well, during WWII, not everyone spoke English, but “R” — or “Roger” — became the internationally accepted way of acknowledging receipt of instructions. (Of course, in 1957 the word “Roger” was replaced with the word “Romeo” but by that time, “Roger” and “received” were synonymous.)

So what about “Wilco”? Its story is even simpler: it’s an abbreviation of “will comply.” So when pilots say “Roger Wilco,” what they mean is “I received your instructions, and I will follow them.”

Roger?

[Via: Reddit. Photo: Devil Ducky]

What Is the Most Annoying Airplane Etiquette Violation?

by Willy Volk on

Cheapflights recently ran a poll on airplane etiquette. Asking the question, “Which of the following airplane etiquette violators do you find most offensive?” the results aren’t too surprising:

  1. Incessant talker
  2. Rapid recliner
  3. Armrest hog

I’m surprised the person who uses their cell phone right up until the very last second (and then powers up the instant the plane lands) didn’t rank higher. Maybe that one struck a little too close to home for most of Cheapflights’ users.

[Via Gridskipper]

Airplane on Conveyor Belt Brain Teaser

by Justin Glow on

I’m surprised this hasn’t been covered here on Gadling. Here’s the hypothetical situation:

If a standard airport runway were replaced with a large conveyor belt — one moving in the opposite direction (and equal speed) that a plane intended to take off in — would the plane ever leave the ground?

Your first thought is no, it won’t take off — I thought this too at first. A car in this situation, for instance, wouldn’t move forward or backwards at all, as long as the conveyor belt was moving in the opposite direction at the exact same speed as the car. If the belt speed and car speed were mismatched at all, the car would move forward or backward. This is because the engine rotates the wheels over the road, and relies on the friction between the two to move the car forward. But a plane is different, and here’s why:

A plane doesn’t rely on friction between its wheels and the ground to take off like a car does. On take-off, the wheels act as a sort of lubricant between the plane and the ground; there is no motor turning them forward to progress the plane, they spin freely. They are only there to make the plane roll down the runway easier. After all, without wheels, the plane’s belly would screech across the ground and cause a lot of friction — but it would still take off, assuming the jet engines are powerful enough to makeup for the added friction. What propels the plane forward are its jet engines, not the wheels; it doesn’t matter if the plane is on a concrete, ice, water, grass, or a conveyor belt — the only thing an opposite-moving conveyor belt would do to the plane is cause its wheels to spin much faster than if it were on a regular, concrete runway. The plane would still take off. This was a hard concept to grasp, but once I did, it made sense.

What do you think?

P.S. This was covered in the NY Times a few months ago, and there’s a HUGE discussion on the true answer to this conundrum; there’s almost 900 comments on David Pogue’s NY Times blog, with conflicting opinions from laymen and physicists alike. Have a look, but be careful — it takes a while to load and may crash your browser due to the number of comments.

Photo by j_wijnands