Pre-plan is a redundancy. Plan means to to draw up a reaction to a situation in advance. So how do you pre-plan?

Not sure how that one got by the editors.

Writes "Dave the enginner"....

"Jet fuel, more specifically JET A, is 99 percent kerosene, which consists mostly of semivolatile petroleum hydrocarbon compounds. The term "volatility" refers to the speed at which a compound evaporates, and does not refer to the explosiveness or reactivity of a substance...."

Dave is correct. Either way I think the message is clear, but highly FLAMMABLE, maybe, is technically more correct. This was an especially annoying gaffe on my part because I specifically adderssd the non-volatility of jet fuel in a past column, and there's a segment in my book about it also. "Volatile" is one of those words we don't really stop and consider.

While I wouldn't recommend trying it, you can hold a lit match above an open tank of jet fuel and it will not ignite. Once the fuel atomizes, however, such as during a serious impact/crash, or otherwise comes in direct contact with an ignition source, it will, obviously, burn quite fiercly.

- Patrick Smith.

"...and if there's a fire encroaching quickly toward thousands of gallons of highly volatile jet fuel."

As an engineer who makes a living cleaning up jet fuel spills, I have to point out the error in the use of the term "highly volatile jet fuel". Jet fuel, more specifically JET A, is 99 percent kerosene, which consists mostly of semivolatile petroleum hydrocarbon compounds. The term "volatility" refers to the speed at which a compound evaporates, and does not refer to the explosiveness or reactivity of a substance.

Despite its more volatile-sounding name, jet fuel is far less volatile than the gasoline you put in your car. In fact, jet fuel is somewhat difficult to ignite at room temperature (however, add a little heat and something to agitate and atomize the jet fuel, and a huge fireball is not far off).

So, while it is fun to bash media for their ignorance of technical aviation issues, the truth is Mr. Smith can be just as prone to hyperbole as the mainstream media.

Still love your column and glad to hear that you're back in the air.

I tend to be the one sitting next to the exit in my natural fiber clothes and flat shoes. If I ever find myself behind that douchebag who thinks he needs to rescue his laptop, he will find it inserted up his rectum, along with my left boot.

Tray tables need to be up, window shades open, laptops and iPods put away. It's not about electronic interference, it's about the need for a speedy egress and situational awareness should anything happen.

Uh huh. I can somewhat understand that situational awareness is improved when you're not jacked-in to your Pod - bugger about those deaf passengers, eh? - but I fail to understand what difference it makes if I'm encrossed in reading my book... whether on my PDA or in hardcopy. Sure, ban radio transmissions throughout the flight and insist that anything that can't fit into the seat-pocket be stowed for takeoff and landing (ie. laptops). As for the rest of it, let's be realistic.

Sorry for saying that Nomex is "flame proof" or mentioning a friend taking up "valuable carry on space" with helmet. Last time I heard the airlines don't generally screen for what you chose to carry on as long as it’s within safety guidelines, and don't most passengers carry their essentials with them for fear of having them lost in transit? Try finding replacement for a custom fitted helmet on short notice. (I'd carry my skis on if they'd let me.) I dare say that nothing is really flame proof when subjected the intense temperatures that can be found in an aircraft fire, even aluminum. And gee whiz the airlines and FAA argue that smoke hoods could make it more difficult for passengers to evacuate a plane. Of course, that can also be difficult when you're blinded and choking on toxic fumes. Right now I guess we will just have to remember how many rows it is to the emergency exit, but you'll have to hope no one steps on your sandal shod toes in the rush for the doors as well. As for me I'll continue to wear my Sketchers, a pair of chinos and long sleeved shirt with the sleeves rolled up. I know that statistically air travel is very safe, and if I get chilly I won't have to ask for a blanket.

Unfortunately, Patrick, this sort of crap resonates with a large segment of the American public.

I was reading an article in the paper this morning about a 70-ish woman who was recently found after having been lost in the woods for a couple weeks. She was found by birdwatchers who were following a flock of ravens. The reporter quoted her family as saying that clearly God was involved in the rescue, because ravens were mentioned in the Bible.

Personally, I prefer to think it was the hand of Edgar Allan Poe, but that's just me.

The growing reliance in our society on superstition over training and competence, common sense, science, and the like is troubling, and the learned helplessness it breeds doesn't bode well.

To reader "Hustle,"

In your critique, you say that you're "leaving the CNN coverage out of it." But that's not fair, since the column was about coverage in whole, not just print coverage.

And you seem to have misunderstood what, in my opinion, made said coverage of the incident "sensationalist." It wasn't a twisting of the facts, it was the lack of facts altogether, together with the repeated reference to "miracles" and other emotional claptrap instead of explaining what actually happened.

For the record, there were pleny of factual errors in the reports I saw/read, including reference to the wrong airline, the wrong aircraft, the wrong number of pilots.... Do you consider those things irrelevant, not "important" enough?

Now, as for "Ceririeid," who writes:

"Perhaps we should just relax and trust the safety statistics; airline accidents are so uncommon that preparing for them by trying to modify passenger behaviour or attitudes might just be pointless."

You might be right, at least in part. It's a tough opinion to defend in our safety-obsessed culture, but I've thought the same thing myself, much as I've been hesitant to admit it.

Patrick Smith