Just wanted to run this idea past folks.

If you generally boycott Boeing over their safety scandals or over their extreme right lobbying contributions that support that climate denying political party, but you find yourself taking a Boeing anyway (e.g. your employer books you on one), why not show up to board the plane wearing a wing suit?

The idea is to convey the idea that a panel can fall off at any moment, inconveniently suck you out, and you have a sudden unplanned need to fly on your own. A parachute is likely too bulky. It’s kind of a way to make a statement.

I’m not sure if the wing suit can be comfortable enough to sit in and actually simultaneously somewhat functional. Would we have to choose between sufficient comfort and sufficient gliding capability, or could we have both?

It doesn’t have to be ugly. Consider those Nepalese and African pants with knee-high crotches. Those are borderline wing suits for the bottom half. When legs are spread, it could reveal something like “Boeing passenger safety pants”.

I suppose the big question would be: would a Boeing pilot exercise their discretion and refuse to carry such a passenger?

  • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    sure, that’s all fine, but a pilot wouldn’t see anyone. Even if he was told, he wouldn’t have to see them. He’d just say “security, deal with it”.

    everyone else would, which is fine, and the process would work fine.

    • activistPnk@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      sure, that’s all fine, but a pilot wouldn’t see anyone.

      Is English your first language? The phrase “I would absolutely see a passenger who is equipped to jump as a safety threat” does not imply a visual line of sight. In this context “see” means to have a viewpoint. Pilots regularly make decisions on whether to carry a problematic passenger without actually seeing them.