6 ms·

I wonder why the advice if you're still on a row of seats is to ditch it. Whilst heavier, it may also be wider. I guess it's the ratio of mass to surface area (

I wonder why the advice if you're still on a row of seats is to ditch it. Whilst heavier, it may also be wider. I guess it's the ratio of mass to surface area (× drag coefficient) that matters, and if the thing you're attached to's mass-to-surface-area ratio is lower, you should keep holding onto it. As long as holding onto it doesn't result in you orienting your body away from presenting the most area to the oncoming air. Don't hold onto a beach ball for example.

Someone 5y ago
I don’t see any advice as to that. FTA: “If thus connected, you have some questions to address. Is your new conveyance air-worthy? […] If you choose to go it alone” Also, even if it is dropping faster, it may be worth it to stay in your seat if you can use it as a crumple zone
stavros 5y ago
> Whilst heavier, it may also be wider Weight/mass doesn't matter, as all objects of the same shape above a certain density fall with the same speed. So literally just pick the widest object you can find, no matter how heavy it is, and ride it.
- bluGill 5y ago
  You want something that will act as a crumple zone and slow your final crash. So seats would be better than a wide sheet of iron of the same mass. At the last moment (and not before) stand on the seat and follow the roll the crash up your body advice.
  - stavros 5y ago
    Yes, but the GP was talking about drag, so I responded to that.
- Enginerrrd 5y ago
  That's not how that works at all. Terminal velocity occurs when the drag force balances the gravitational force. So F_d = F_g F_d is proportional to the area of the object and the velocity squared. F_g is proportional to the mass. So, for constant area, at terminal velocity we have v^2 ~ m or v ~ m^(1/2) where "~" denotes a proportional relation. Thus a heavier object falls at a higher terminal velocity than a lighter one.
  - stavros 5y ago
    Ah, you are right, I was thinking acceleration.
Symmetry 5y ago
Given a constant shape and density, terminal velocity goes up proportionally to the square root of the length of the object. Unless the object your grabbing is noticeably less dense than you are, which I'd guess wouldn't be true for the seat row, you're better off separated.
godshatter 5y ago
If by some chance the row of seats is not spinning wildly and is just falling in it's normal (pre-accident) orientation then you should see if you're butt is being pressed into the seat or if you are lifting up constrained only by your seatbelt. Butt into seat, stay. Constrained by seatbelt, unlatch.
- LorenPechtel 5y ago
  Why unstrap? Having the seat underneath you gives you a bit of crumple and some protection from landing on something sticking up. In her case I suspect it had a lot to do with her survival--since she came down in rainforest I suspect the seat hit a lot of branches.
- dTal 5y ago
  Note that your terminal velocity is not an intrinsic property, but a consequence of air resistance on your body - air resistance you will not be feeling when enveloped by a row of airline seats. Even if the seat row has a higher terminal velocity than you would by yourself, its wake will take you with it. Which isn't to say you won't feel your seatbelt tugging on you. You will likely be straining painfully against it. But that's because you'll be tumbling wildly, the entire assembly battered and buffeted by huge forces.
OminousWeapons 5y ago
Naively I would assume that one risk might be the seat itself causing you damage upon impact. At those speeds could there be a risk of the entire seat coming apart on impact and impaling you with metal shards?
rozab 5y ago
This article isn't meant to be serious, I don't think. Juliane Koepcke, one of the only people to survive such a fall, did it strapped into a row of seats. And when she landed she was in good enough shape to survive 11 days in the Amazon rainforest (!!!) and make her own way to safety. So I'd say statistically, it's about the best thing you can do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juliane_Koepcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juliane_Koepcke

Someone 5y ago

I don’t see any advice as to that. FTA: “If thus connected, you have some questions to address. Is your new conveyance air-worthy? […] If you choose to go it alone” Also, even if it is dropping faster, it may be worth it to stay in your seat if you can use it as a crumple zone

stavros 5y ago

> Whilst heavier, it may also be wider Weight/mass doesn't matter, as all objects of the same shape above a certain density fall with the same speed. So literally just pick the widest object you can find, no matter how heavy it is, and ride it.

bluGill 5y ago
You want something that will act as a crumple zone and slow your final crash. So seats would be better than a wide sheet of iron of the same mass. At the last moment (and not before) stand on the seat and follow the roll the crash up your body advice.
- stavros 5y ago
  Yes, but the GP was talking about drag, so I responded to that.
Enginerrrd 5y ago
That's not how that works at all. Terminal velocity occurs when the drag force balances the gravitational force. So F_d = F_g F_d is proportional to the area of the object and the velocity squared. F_g is proportional to the mass. So, for constant area, at terminal velocity we have v^2 ~ m or v ~ m^(1/2) where "~" denotes a proportional relation. Thus a heavier object falls at a higher terminal velocity than a lighter one.
- stavros 5y ago
  Ah, you are right, I was thinking acceleration.

Symmetry 5y ago

Given a constant shape and density, terminal velocity goes up proportionally to the square root of the length of the object. Unless the object your grabbing is noticeably less dense than you are, which I'd guess wouldn't be true for the seat row, you're better off separated.

godshatter 5y ago

If by some chance the row of seats is not spinning wildly and is just falling in it's normal (pre-accident) orientation then you should see if you're butt is being pressed into the seat or if you are lifting up constrained only by your seatbelt. Butt into seat, stay. Constrained by seatbelt, unlatch.

LorenPechtel 5y ago
Why unstrap? Having the seat underneath you gives you a bit of crumple and some protection from landing on something sticking up. In her case I suspect it had a lot to do with her survival--since she came down in rainforest I suspect the seat hit a lot of branches.
dTal 5y ago
Note that your terminal velocity is not an intrinsic property, but a consequence of air resistance on your body - air resistance you will not be feeling when enveloped by a row of airline seats. Even if the seat row has a higher terminal velocity than you would by yourself, its wake will take you with it. Which isn't to say you won't feel your seatbelt tugging on you. You will likely be straining painfully against it. But that's because you'll be tumbling wildly, the entire assembly battered and buffeted by huge forces.

OminousWeapons 5y ago

Naively I would assume that one risk might be the seat itself causing you damage upon impact. At those speeds could there be a risk of the entire seat coming apart on impact and impaling you with metal shards?

rozab 5y ago

This article isn't meant to be serious, I don't think. Juliane Koepcke, one of the only people to survive such a fall, did it strapped into a row of seats. And when she landed she was in good enough shape to survive 11 days in the Amazon rainforest (!!!) and make her own way to safety. So I'd say statistically, it's about the best thing you can do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juliane_Koepcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juliane_Koepcke