Not many pilots or cabin crew in on this topic because 99.99% of flights operate as planned, i.e. we don’t put you in the Atlantic/Pacific/nearest body of water or scatter your charred remains across a mountainside. If you cannot stand turbulence or the odd crappy landing, take the train or buy a Roadmaster...

It was a phenomenal effort on behalf of the crew with, as you say, an unhappy ending. Some airlines work like ours and will keep at it, stopping only briefly to strap themselves in for landing, and then carrying on. Some will say ‘oh dear’, try to find some unoccupied seats or just pull up a blanket.

That’s not a great reason to be a pilot because, as you’ll find out, you don’t get to go where Bob is going. You end up back where you started. Or somewhere 5 sectors downroute in Little Shitsville...

Unfortunately, my dear chap, that’s what you get when you buy the cheapest ticket going. Not a bad aircraft (the Dash 8 is great - loads of power), not a bad crew (Flybe crew are great) but you get a turboprop, because they’re cheap to operate.

Fortunately, the command structure is now a little less vertical than in those days. Crews, from First Officers to brand-new cabin crew are expected to voice any concerns to the captain, or someone further up the chain.

I’ve genuinely done it, on a trans-Atlantic flight. A fairly young lady (50s) with teenage children and husband packed her heart medication in her hold baggage because it made her feet swell up and she’d heard long-distance did that as well - didn’t want to feel uncomfortable.

Heh, as a ‘70s child I do remember it. Not great at all, I agree.

That badge is the only bit of of my Neon interior that still functions correctly. It informs me who made the car, 100% of the time, and does so very accurately every time I look at it.

Interesting and unusual.

Whilst this is, as people have already pointed out, a continuation of an existing agreement between Russia and Syria, it is a timely reminder that a strong alliance between Europe and the USA is still relevant and important.

I’m not entirely convinced that Europe is unable to defend itself from any Russian military threat without the assistance of the USA.

No fight from me. Just wish they’d engineered them as well as they styled them!

I have no idea, unfortunately, but it would have been a shame if that was the case. The Audi is a bit of a nightmare from an engineering standpoint, the Mercs just rust a bit; whilst our Royal Family has always had to support British industry, car manufacturing is now so global that snubbing an Audi would mean 100…

2" but I know what you mean. It’s my reductionist argument. The air passes cleanly through, yes? The structural stability of the remaining steel is not what’s under debate.

Oh, ffs. It was an open-ended invitation to dive into a discussion about aerodynamics, mathematics, etc based on a shitty portrait video of a truck falling over.

Here’s something to think about then...

I haven’t ‘been told’ anything many, many times. I‘ve had an interesting series of discussions with a lot of people I’d never otherwise meet about an aerodynamics/engineering issue that originated from some awful portrait video of a truck getting blown over.

Unfair, my dear chap. The general concensus appears to be ‘unreasonable due to cost’ and there have been some superb technical replies as well. I have yet to hear anything concrete, mathematically or from an engineering standpoint that says ‘no, we couldn’t put in a system that would allow some trucks to operate in…

Sadly, it’s not that rare in the UK in the winter. We import a huge amount of goods by road (your passenger rail system is terrible, but the freight system works - vice versa in Europe) and the weather, especially in Scotland, catches out many drivers.

Alas, so many critics. You’re not the first to bring this up and I’m also the first to admit I’m not a ground transport professional.