Many people have asked me the question: "Which airline is the safest to fly on?" My standard answer is: While the safety records of different airlines do provide a good reference, a "brand name" does not automatically make your flight safer, much less guarantee a permanent zero-accident record.
Singapore Airlines does have an outstanding flight safety record, but because plane accident rates are calculated at "per million flight hours," every major plane accident can be seen as an isolated event. Each accident is caused by a combination of certain specific circumstances. Therefore, flight safety does not depend on a "brand name" but on continuous joint efforts by government authorities, airline employees and the general public.
After Tuesday's accident, many people may be asking yet another question: which part of the plane is the safest? The answer: so far we do not have any scientific evidence indicating which part of a plane may be the safest. In fact, carefully reading safety instructions and listening to the crew's emergency demonstrations make a much bigger difference in guaranteeing flight safety than where you sit.
Also, the distribution of weight on an aircraft affects its stability. An aircraft's seating is arranged according to weight-balance analyses. Therefore, changing your seat at will may have an adverse affect on flight safety.
Many people harbor a fatalistic attitude while flying on aircraft. They believe if there is a disaster waiting for you, you can't avoid it. As a result, they do not pay heed to safety instructions or the crew's demonstrations. However, catastrophic plane accidents -- in which no passenger has any chance of survival -- occur much less frequently than we imagine. Certainly, a change in attitude, from fatalistic to alert and arranging for air travel accordingly can better guarantee passengers safe flights.
Jing Hung-sying is a professor in the department of aeronautics and astronautics at National Cheng Kung University.
Translated by Francis Huang.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with