Nepal: Reports say 72 people including four crew members were on board when the plane crashed. (Photo: News18)
Explained: A Nepalese aircraft carrying 68 passengers and 4 members crashed between Old Airport and Pokhara International Airport. A look at what determines survival in an air crash
Reports said that a 72-seater passenger plane crashed on the runway of Pokhara International Airport in Nepal. The aircraft was carrying 68 passengers and four crew members when it crashed between the old airport and Pokhara International Airport.
Sources said there were several Indians on board the plane and top officials of the Nepal Airport Authority said a helicopter rescue operation was underway.
Amidst the evolution, here’s a look at what determines survivability in a plane crash:
What are your chances of surviving a plane crash?
According to a BBC report, there is no clear answer to this – just as we cannot say with certainty how long car accidents can survive, as it depends entirely on the circumstances.
But when the US National Transportation Safety Board reviewed national aviation accidents from 1983–1999, it found that more than 95% of aircraft occupants survived accidents, including 55% of the most serious incidents.
The probability largely depends on factors such as the presence of fire, the height of the accident and its location.
The European Transport Safety Council estimated in a 1996 study that 90% of aircraft accidents were technically survivable.
In the two decades since these two studies, airline safety has improved even further, with a steady decline in fatal accidents.
What determines whether a crash is survivable or not?
Tom Farrier, former director of safety at the Air Transport Association, explained on the website Quora that three general conditions help determine whether a crash is survivable:
whether the forces encountered by the human occupants are within the limits of human tolerance
whether the structures around them (i.e. the aircraft) are largely intact
whether the post-crash environment presents an immediate danger to occupants or rescuers
In short: how bad was an impact to the body, how much damage was done to the aircraft, and whether the wreckage and surrounding environment are safe.
Asked whether it was worse to crash on land or sea, aviation consultant Adrian Gertsen says it has more to do with the proximity of rescue services than the surface.
“For example, during the incident on the Hudson River, rescue services were readily available. But if you’re in the middle of the ocean it’s going to be even more difficult to get back to dry land,” he told the BBC.
People also debate where it is safest to sit on a plane, and some research suggests that crash records suggest that the rear may be slightly safer.
Mr Gjertsson says it’s not that simple, and it all depends on the aircraft and the individual incident.
“One of the problems is the willingness of travelers to pick up their luggage and leave with it,” he says.
“It will affect the safety – not only of ourselves, but of everyone else.
“It’s essentially human nature to want that, but you need to get away from the situation if something goes wrong.”
In general, experts say it’s important to be aware of your surroundings and get out quickly, as is listening to the rest of the safety advice given.
read all latest explainer Here