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.
A return to power for former US president Donald Trump would pose grave risks to Taiwan’s security, autonomy and the broader stability of the Indo-Pacific region. The stakes have never been higher as China aggressively escalates its pressure on Taiwan, deploying economic, military and psychological tactics aimed at subjugating the nation under Beijing’s control. The US has long acted as Taiwan’s foremost security partner, a bulwark against Chinese expansionism in the region. However, a second Trump presidency could upend decades of US commitments, introducing unpredictability that could embolden Beijing and severely compromise Taiwan’s position. While president, Trump’s foreign policy reflected a transactional
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has prioritized modernizing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to rival the US military, with many experts believing he would not act on Taiwan until the PLA is fully prepared to confront US forces. At the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th Party Congress in 2022, Xi emphasized accelerating this modernization, setting 2027 — the PLA’s centennial — as the new target, replacing the previous 2035 goal. US intelligence agencies said that Xi has directed the PLA to be ready for a potential invasion of Taiwan by 2027, although no decision on launching an attack had been made. Whether
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.