飞机上的误解:舱门、高空飞行、飞行模式与食物口味的真相 veritasium 2024-08-31

飞机舱门为何无需上锁?

大多数飞机舱门都没有上锁。 它们没有钥匙、传感器或密码来确保安全。 如果有人想拉动把手,他们就能做到。

  • 一名男子打开了紧急出口门,强行离开了飞机。 然而,每年有4000万次航班,这些门在飞行中几乎从未被打开过。 那么,为什么呢?
  • 当然是出于自我保护。
  • 常识。
  • 大多数人都足够聪明,不会去乱动那些东西。
View/Hide Original English

Most plane doors aren't locked. There are no keys, no sensors or passcodes to secure them. If someone wants to pull the lever, they can. - A man opened the emergency exit door and forced his way off the plane. And yet with 40 million flights each year, these doors are virtually never opened in flight. So, why not? - Your self preservation, surely. - Common sense. - Most people are, you know, smart enough to not mess with that.

飞机高飞的真正原因

真正的答案在于飞机飞行的位置。

  • 飞机大约飞多高?
  • 10,000公里?是不是太高了?
  • 我觉得太高了,那样你就到太空了。
  • 25,000公里?那是飞机飞行的高度吗?
  • 是不是太低了?
  • 太高了,太高了,太高了,降下来一点。
  • 也许是1,000公里?
  • 1,000公里仍然在太空。
  • 我觉得是50,000英尺。
  • 是的,有些飞机可以飞到43,000英尺。
  • 30,000英尺。
  • 38,000英尺。
  • 是的。 它们为什么要飞那么高呢? 呃……
  • 我不知道,我想是为了安全吧。
  • 可能是为了避免与其他飞机相撞,以及避开高山山脉。
  • 我不知道,是不是为了避开风暴或恶劣天气?
  • 我猜是为了避开湍流天气。
View/Hide Original English

The real answer relies on where planes fly. - How high do planes fly approximately? - 10,000 km or is that overshooting it? - I think that's overshooting it. I think you'd be in space. - 25,000 km. That's the height of a plane flying? - Is that way too low? - It's too much. It's too much. Too much. Too much. Bring it down. - Maybe yeah, 1,000 km? - 1,000 km, still space. - 50,000 ft, I think. - Yeah, some of them can go up to 43,000 ft. - 30,000 ft. - 38,000 ft. - Yeah. Why do they fly that high? Uhh... - I don't know. Safety, I guess. - Probably to avoid collision with other aircraft and if there's high mountain ranges. - I don't know, when storms or weather hit? - My guess is to avoid the turbulent weather.

我认为这是一个不错的猜测。现在,在30,000英尺高空飞行的一个好处确实是飞行更平稳。这处于对流层(Troposphere: 大气层中最低且最稠密的部分,大部分天气现象发生在此层)的高处,大部分天气现象都发生在这层。因此,湍流较少,需要避开的风暴也较少。但这并不是飞机飞得如此之高的主要原因。更大的原因当然是金钱。随着高度的升高,空气密度会降低,在33,000英尺或10公里高空,空气密度仅为海平面的三分之一。因此,在这个高度飞行,飞机遇到的空气分子只有在地面附近的三分之一。这意味着飞机在相同推力下可以飞行约73%的速度。结果是,您能更快到达目的地,而且由于在空中花费的时间更少,燃油消耗也更少。

View/Hide Original English

I think that's a decent guess. Now, it's true that one of the benefits of flying at 30,000 ft is a smoother ride. This is high in the troposphere, the layer in which most weather occurs. So, there's less turbulence and fewer storms to navigate around. But this is not the main reason that planes fly so high. The bigger reason, of course, is money. As you go up, the density of air decreases and at 33,000 ft or 10 km, the density of air is just a third of what it is at sea level. So flying at this altitude, the plane runs into a third of the air molecules it would closer to the ground. That means the plane can fly about 73% faster for the same amount of thrust. And as a result, you get to your destination faster and since you spend less time in the air, you burn less fuel.

从某种程度上看,爬升似乎是浪费能量。你能比较一下下降和爬升吗?你是否在下降时基本上能把能量收回来?

  • 是的。我们爬升时每分钟燃烧大约80公斤燃油。巡航时每分钟燃烧大约40公斤。下降时可能只有10公斤。所以几乎可以忽略不计。 不仅如此,喷气发动机在高空效率更高。它们通过在进气口压缩空气,与燃油混合并点燃来工作。因此,燃烧产物会从排气喷嘴高速喷出。空气越冷,这个过程就越高效。而在高空,温度约为零下50摄氏度,比地面平均零上15摄氏度要冷得多。所以,飞得更高意味着你燃烧更少的燃油,飞行时间更短,并且避开了低空的天气和相关的湍流。
  • 另一个你想飞高高的原因是利用喷气气流的顺风,公司喜欢这样做的人,因为你燃烧的燃油更少,所以成本也更低。
View/Hide Original English

It seems in a way that like climbing is wasted energy. Can you compare like the descent to the ascent? Do you essentially get the energy back as you fall down the other side? - Yeah. When we climb, we burn about 80 kilos per minute. In cruise, we burn about 40 kilos per minute. And in descent, it's maybe 10. So, it's almost negligible. Not only that, jet engines are more efficient at altitude. They work by compressing air at the intake, mixing it with fuel and igniting it. So, the combustion products are ejected very fast from the exhaust nozzle. Now, this process is more efficient the colder the air is. And at altitude, the temperature is around minus 50 degrees Celsius, which is a lot colder than an average of plus 15 here at the ground. So, flying higher means you burn less fuel for less time and avoid the weather and associated turbulence of lower altitudes. - The other reason you wanna fly high is to take advantage of the jet stream tailwinds and the company likes people who do that, because you're burning less fuel, so it's less money.

高空飞行的挑战:呼吸与增压

但是,飞得这么高也有一个问题。那里的空气是无法呼吸的。如果你突然被传送到珠穆朗玛峰顶,一个比飞机飞行高度还低的地方,你只能保持清醒大约三分钟。这是因为除了密度随高度下降外,气压也随之下降。气压下降得更快,因为它取决于你上方所有空气的重量。所以在10公里高空,气压只有海平面的四分之一。

View/Hide Original English

But there is a problem with flying this high. The air up there is unbreathable. If you were suddenly teleported to the top of Mount Everest, a height lower than planes fly, you would remain conscious for only about three minutes. This is because in addition to density dropping with altitude, so does air pressure. Air pressure actually falls off faster, because it depends on the weight of all the air above you. So at 10 km, the air pressure is only a quarter of what it is at sea level.

需要明确的是,空气中仍然有21%的氧气,但氧气的分压——仅由氧气分子施加的压力——约为5.5千帕(Kilopascals: 压强单位),是地面压力的四分之一。在这种压力下,肺部无法将足够的氧气分子强行压入血液。为了正常运作,人类需要至少16千帕的氧气分压。因此,所有在高空巡航的飞机客舱都必须增压。少量的空气会不断地从外部引入客舱。它实际上是从喷气发动机的压缩阶段进入的。这就是维持飞机内部可呼吸空气的方式。

  • 缺点是你会牺牲发动机一点点效率。
View/Hide Original English

To be clear, the air is still 21% oxygen, but the partial pressure of oxygen, the pressure exerted solely by oxygen molecules is around 5.5 kilopascals, which is a quarter of what it is on the ground. Now at this pressure, not enough oxygen molecules can force their way into your blood in your lungs. To function normally, humans need an oxygen partial pressure of at least 16 kilopascals. So, all the cabins of airplanes that cruise at high altitude must be pressurized. A little bit of air is continuously brought into the cabin from outside. It actually comes in from the compression stage of the jet engines. That is what maintains breathable air inside the plane. - The downside is that you are taking away a little bit of the efficiency of the engines.

飞机舱门的设计奥秘

客舱增压需要对飞机进行彻底的重新设计。在增压之前,飞机通常飞行到10,000英尺(约3公里)的高度,那里的氧气分压为15千帕,刚好是人类可以承受的极限。在这些飞机上,舱门是向外打开的,而且人们不太担心舱门周围的密封性,因为两侧的压力是相同的。但一旦飞机开始增压,所有的舱门都被改成了塞子形状。它们内侧比外侧更宽。这样,客舱内较高的压力会将舱门推入其框架,形成气密密封。

View/Hide Original English

Now, pressurizing the cabin required a radical redesign of aircraft. Before pressurization, planes would fly up to 10,000 feet or around three kilometers, where the partial pressure of oxygen is 15 kilopascals, just at the limit of what people can handle. On these planes, doors opened outward and there wasn't much concern about the seal around them since the pressure was the same on both sides. But once planes were pressurized, all the doors were changed to be the shape of a plug. They're wider on the inside than the outside. That way the higher pressure inside the cabin pushes the door into its frame, creating an airtight seal.

客舱有多气密?

  • 相当气密,但并非完全气密。例如,你会注意到每次有人冲厕所时,气压都会下降一点。所以每次发生这种情况,你实际上可以看到客舱高度略有跳动。 这就是为什么飞机舱门和紧急出口门不需要锁。增压客舱与低压外部之间的压力差非常大,没有人能强行将门向内拉开。如果有人在飞行途中过来转动了门把手呢?什么都不会发生。
View/Hide Original English

How airtight is a cabin? - It's pretty airtight, but not completely airtight. So, you'll notice for example, every time that someone flushes the toilet, you'll see some of the air pressure go down. So every time that happens, you can actually see the cabin altitude jump a little bit. And this is why plane doors and emergency exit doors don't need locks. The difference in pressure between the pressurized cabin and the low pressure exterior is so great that no one is strong enough to pull the door inwards. And if someone had come up and turned that while you're mid-flight? Nothing.

即使是现代的向外开启的飞机舱门,也设计成塞子形状。它们只是巧妙地设计了。波音737的主客舱门比它需要穿过的框架更宽更高。但当你拉动把手时,顶部和底部的门闩会向内折叠,刚好减小高度。然而,两侧仍然太宽。所以门必须先向内弹出并旋转。正是这种向内移动在高空是无法实现的。它需要相当于举起9,000公斤的力。

View/Hide Original English

Even modern plane doors that open outward are shaped like plugs. They're just cleverly designed. The main passenger door on a Boeing 737 is both wider and taller than the frame it needs to pass through. But when you pull the lever, gates at the top and bottom fold in, reducing the height just enough. However, the sides are still too wide. So, the door first has to pop inside and rotate. It's that movement inwards that is impossible at altitude. It would require a force equivalent to lifting 9,000 kilograms.

客舱增压的限度与意外后果

飞机客舱甚至没有完全增压到海平面101.3千帕的压力。如果你带一袋薯片上飞机,你可能已经注意到了这一点。在地面上很容易挤压,但随着飞机爬升,客舱内的压力下降,薯片袋会像气球一样膨胀。我测量了我乘坐的飞机上的压力,在巡航高度,压力下降到77千帕。这意味着氧气分压只有16千帕,这是机上人员感觉正常的最低要求。这带来了一些意想不到的后果。你觉得你在飞机上放屁更多吗? (受访者笑)

  • 如果我放了,我会怪别人。
  • 我觉得不会。
  • 不会。
  • 不会。
  • 我可不能在飞机上放屁,绝对不行。你觉得你在飞机上放屁比在地面上更多吗?
  • 百分之百,毫不犹豫。当然,我的意思是这肯定和客舱压力有关,对吧?
  • 所以当你上升时,这里的空腔现在会膨胀,空气想要去某个地方,最快能去的地方就是下方。
  • 薯片袋自己就爆开了。
View/Hide Original English

And airplane cabins aren't even fully pressurized to the sea level pressure of 101.3 kilopascals. You may have noticed this if you take a bag of chips on a plane. It's easy to squish on the ground but as the plane climbs, the pressure in the cabin drops and the chip bag seems to inflate like a balloon. I measured the pressure in my plane and at cruising altitude, the pressure dropped to 77 kilopascals. Meaning the partial pressure of oxygen was only 16 kilopascals, the minimum required for people on the plane to feel normal. This has some unintended consequences. Do you think you fart more in a plane? (interviewee laughing) - If I did, I'd blame someone else. - I feel like no. - No. - No - I can't let it rip, no way in the world. Do you think you fart more in a plane than on the ground? - A hundred percent, no hesitation. Sure, I mean it's gotta do with the cabin pressure, right? - So as you go up, that cavity in here now expands and the air wants to go somewhere, and the quickest place it can go is south. - Bag of chips just popped by itself.

阿罗哈航空事故与客舱增压的平衡

现在,国际空间站增压到海平面压力,即101.3千帕。那么,为什么飞机只增压到尽可能低的程度来搭载乘客呢?这其实有一个非常好的理由。1988年,阿罗哈航空243号航班从希洛飞往夏威夷檀香山。客舱正在按照我们描述的方式增压,但不幸的是,这架飞机的机身有一个小裂缝,突然在24,000英尺高空,裂缝扩大,整个机顶从飞机前部撕裂。奇迹般的是,飞行员成功安全降落,只有一人遇难。国际空间站和飞机之间的区别在于,国际空间站只增压一次,然后保持增压状态。但飞机每次爬升到巡航高度都会经历压力差。因此,机身在每次飞行中都会被拉伸然后放松。拉伸和放松,拉伸和放松。阿罗哈航空的飞机拥有世界上第二高的波音737飞行周期次数,总计近90,000次。这远远超出了其设计寿命。这导致了疲劳、裂纹、腐蚀,以及最终的爆炸性减压。因此,飞机被增压到尽可能低的程度,以最大程度地减少应力并延长飞机的使用寿命。

View/Hide Original English

Now, the International Space Station is pressurized to sea level pressure, 101.3 kilopascals. So, why are planes pressurized to the minimum extent possible to carry human passengers? Well, it's actually for a very good reason. In 1988, Aloha Airlines 243 was en route from Hilo to Honolulu, Hawaii. The cabin was being pressurized as we've described, but unfortunately, this plane's fuselage had a small crack and all of a sudden at 24,000 feet, the crack widened and the whole roof tore off the front of the plane. Miraculously the pilots were able to land safely and only one person was killed. The difference between the International Space Station and a plane is that the ISS was pressurized once and it stays pressurized. But a plane experiences a pressure difference every time it climbs to cruising altitude. So, the fuselage is stretched and then relaxed with every flight. Stretched and relaxed, stretched and relaxed. The Aloha Airlines plane had the second highest 737 flight cycle count in the world, with nearly 90,000 in total. That's way more than it was designed for. This led to fatigue, cracking, corrosion, and the eventual explosive decompression. So, planes are pressurized to the least extent possible to minimize stresses and extend the life of the plane.

但即使是75%的大气压力也应该足以防止舱门打开。那么,2023年5月,这又是怎么发生的呢?

  • 一名乘客惊慌失措,竟然在飞行中设法打开了一架空客的紧急出口。他们当时正在进行最后进近,离地面很近,所以压力差非常小。由于他用尽全力,他竟然设法打开了门,这太疯狂了,我们以为那是不可能的。但如果你非常想要某样东西,我想它是可能的。
  • 哇。他没事吗?
  • 他没事。在那次事件中,所有人都没事。
View/Hide Original English

But even 75% of atmospheric pressure should be plenty to prevent the doors from opening. So, how did this happen in May, 2023? - A passenger panicked and actually managed to open an Airbus emergency exit in flight. They were on final approach and they were quite close to the ground, so the pressure differential was very little. And because of him using all of his force, he actually managed to get the door open, which was crazy and we didn't think that that was possible. But if you want something bad enough, I guess it is. - Wow. Was he okay? - He was okay. Everyone was okay in that case.

飞行模式的迷思:手机干扰与法规演变

那是一次相当严重的事故。所以,我想下一个合乎逻辑的问题是:是否有其他乘客无意中造成了事故,比如忘记将手机设置为飞行模式?当你坐在停机坪上,他们过来告诉你把手机设置为飞行模式时,你照做了吗?他们为什么要我们这样做?原因是什么?有原因吗?

  • 显然,如果没有任何好处,他们是不会要求你这样做的。
  • 我不幸有点叛逆,我不遵守规则,是的。
  • 但你不担心把飞机弄下来吗?
  • 我会确保我父母的手机开启飞行模式,这样我就可以关闭它。
  • 我的意思是,是的,我会这样做,因为我不想它干扰无线电或其他什么。
  • 嗯,我认为这是通信干扰。
  • 我感觉我一直被告知它会干扰仪器,但老实说,你总是被告知要这样做。所以你知道,就得把手机设置为飞行模式。
View/Hide Original English

That was a pretty serious mishap. So, I guess the next logical question is: Have any other passengers inadvertently caused a mishap, by say, forgetting to put their phone on airplane mode? When you're sitting there on the tarmac and they come on and tell you to put your phone on airplane mode, do you do it? And why do they get us to do that? What is the reason? Is there a reason? - Obviously, they wouldn't ask you to do it if it wasn't for some benefit. - I'm unfortunately a bit of a rebel and I don't follow the rules and yeah. - But you're not worried about taking the plane down? - I'd make sure my parents have the airplane mode on so I can have it off. - I mean, yes I do because I don't want it interfering with like the radio or whatever. - Well, I think it's the communication interference. - I feel like I've always been told like it messes up like instruments, but honestly you're always just told to do it. So you know, just gotta put your phone in airplane mode.

1961年,FAA(Federal Aviation Administration: 美国联邦航空管理局)发现一些便携式调频收音机可能会干扰飞机导航系统,因为它们使用了相邻的无线电频段。出于谨慎,他们禁止了飞机上几乎所有个人电子设备。但航空公司可以测试任何设备是否存在干扰,并推翻FAA的禁令,允许其上机。任何设备都可以,除了手机,因为另一个组织对手机拥有管辖权,那就是FCC(Federal Communications Commission: 美国联邦通信委员会)。

View/Hide Original English

In 1961, the Federal Aviation Administration or FAA found that some portable FM radios could interfere with plane navigation systems since they used neighboring radio bands. And out of caution, they banned almost all personal electronics on flights. But airlines could test any device for interference and overrule the FAA ban to allow it on board. Any device, that is, except a phone, because another organization has jurisdiction over phones and that's the Federal Communications Commission, or FCC.

你看,地面上的手机,周围有建筑物和山丘,通常只能同时看到一两个蜂窝基站。但从空中看,它可以看到10个、20个甚至更多。人们担心200部以每小时800公里速度飞行的飞机上的手机会迅速同时连接到许多基站,从而使基础设施过载。至少FCC认为可能会发生这种情况。所以,他们在1991年禁止了飞行中的手机使用。

View/Hide Original English

See a phone on the ground with buildings and hills around it can usually only see one or two cell towers at the same time. But from the air, it could see 10 or 20 or more. The concern was that 200 phones traveling at 800 kilometers per hour in a plane could rapidly connect to many towers at once, overloading the infrastructure. At least that's what the FCC thought could happen. So, they banned cell phone use in flight in 1991.

但这个理论有一个问题。飞机是一个巨大的金属外壳,本质上是一个法拉第笼(Faraday cage: 一种用于阻挡电磁场的封闭导电体)。所以,它应该能阻挡几乎所有的电磁信号。这就是为什么飞机天线位于外部。你的手机信号只能通过窗户逸出,这意味着它们是水平地从飞机两侧出去的。所以它们必须传播很长的距离才能到达地面。而你的手机试图连接的蜂窝基站,它们是向下倾斜的,你知道,是为了收集地面上行走的人们的所有信号。所以,从空中建立连接非常困难,除非你飞得很低。因此,手机只有在起飞或降落时才可能干扰地面网络。而FCC甚至从未测试过这种情况是否属实。

View/Hide Original English

But there's a problem with this theory. A plane is a big metal enclosure, essentially a Faraday cage. So, it should block almost all electromagnetic signals. That's why plane antennas are located on the outside. Your phone signals can only escape through the windows, which means they go horizontally out the sides of the plane. So, they would have to travel long distances before reaching the ground. And the cell towers your phone is trying to connect to, well they are tilted downwards, you know, to collect all the signals from people walking around on the ground. So, it's very hard to make a connection from the air unless you're flying really low. So, phones could only conceivably disrupt ground networks during takeoff or landing. And the FCC never even tested if this was the case.

2005年,他们向国会表示,禁止在飞行中使用800兆赫手机的规定可能不再需要,以保护地面蜂窝网络。据我们所知,手机从未导致过空难。飞行模式唯一确定的作用是节省你的电池寿命。那么,这些规定为什么仍然存在呢?

  • 我自己也飞过飞机,当我与空中交通管制通话时,如果我遇到干扰,你知道,那种(模仿手机信号的声音)信号,那是因为有人在使用手机或者手机开着。一架飞机上的一部手机会引起任何问题吗?可能不会。200部手机会造成什么吗?也许会。与其冒险说“让每个人都在500英尺高空更新他们的推特资料”,不如说“不,把它们关掉,在高空享受Wi-Fi就好。”
View/Hide Original English

In 2005, they went before Congress and said the rule banning 800 MHz cell phone use in flight may not be needed in order to protect ground-based cellular networks. As far as we know, a mobile phone has never caused an air accident. All airplane mode does for sure is save your battery life. So, why are these rules still around? - I've been flying myself and where I've gotten interference, you know, when you're talking to a traffic control and you get that (imitating a phone signal), you know that signal, and that is because someone is either using their phone or the phone is on. Will one phone in an aircraft cause any problems? Probably not. Will 200 do something? Maybe. Rather than taking the chance of like, let's everyone update their Twitter profile at 500 feet, rather than saying that, we're saying no, you know, just keep them off, you know, enjoy the Wi-Fi up at altitude and that's it.

但飞行模式可能很快就会成为过去。欧盟实际上不再要求使用它,并正在推动航空公司在所有欧盟航班上提供5G服务。所以,我们可能会消除这种不便,但我们仍然要处理飞机餐。你觉得飞机餐怎么样?

  • 我只吃面包卷。那是我唯一能吃的。除此之外,所有东西都像糊状物。
  • 它可以非常好。也可以非常糟糕。
  • 嗯,有点平淡,口感不同。
  • 你觉得飞机上的食物和在地面上一样好吃吗?
  • 不。
View/Hide Original English

But airplane mode might soon be a thing of the past. The EU actually no longer requires it and is pushing for airlines to provide 5G service on all EU flights. So, we may eliminate that inconvenience, but we still have to deal with airplane food. What do you think about airplane food? - I only eat the bread rolls. That's only thing I can handle. Apart from that, everything tastes like mush. - It's can be very good. It can be very terrible. - Eh, bland-ish, different consistency. - Do you think the food tastes as good in a plane as it would on the ground? - No.

飞机餐的秘密:味觉变化与番茄汁

但是,难吃的食物可能不全是航空公司的错。你看,泵入客舱的空气非常干燥。作为参考,撒哈拉沙漠的平均相对湿度为25%,但飞机客舱内的湿度可能低至5%。这会使你的鼻腔干燥,从而影响你的嗅觉,进而影响味觉。较低的客舱压力也会降低对咸味和甜味等感觉的强度。但有一种味道似乎在飞行中会增强。你在飞机上喝什么?你选择的饮料是什么?

  • 苹果汁。
  • 苹果汁?
  • 是的。
  • 有趣。
  • 我的意思是可乐,那是默认的。
  • 橙汁或苹果汁。
  • 杜松子酒加奎宁水。
  • 也许是血腥玛丽,但是……
  • 你是今天第一个说这个的。
  • 真的吗?
  • 是的。
View/Hide Original English

But bad-tasting food might not be all the airlines' fault. See, the air that's pumped into the cabin altitude is really dry. And the Sahara Desert for reference has an average relative humidity of 25%, but inside an airplane cabin, it can be as low as 5%. This can dry out your nasal passages, hindering your sense of smell and therefore taste. The lower cabin pressure can also decrease sensations like the intensity of salt and sugar. But there is one flavor that appears to be enhanced in flight. What do you drink in an airplane? What's your drink of choice? - Apple juice. - Apple juice? - Yeah. - Interesting. - I mean Coke, that's default - Orange or apple juice. - Gin and tonic. - Maybe a Bloody Mary, but... - You're the first one today. - Really? - Yeah.

一项对一千名飞行员进行的德国调查发现,超过四分之一的人在飞行中点番茄汁。真正奇怪的是,其中23%的人在地面上从不喝番茄汁。你会喝血腥玛丽吗?那会是酒吧里的标准饮料,还是飞机上的特殊饮料?

  • 我只在飞机上喝。 那么,为什么每个人都点番茄汁呢?这可能是因为噪音。2015年的一项研究指出鼓索神经(chorda tympani: 一种传递味觉信息从舌头到脑干的神经),它从舌头向脑干传递味觉信息。它正好经过耳膜,穿过微小的传音骨。所以,嘈杂的客舱噪音可能会无意中刺激它。这可能会产生一种听觉错觉,增强我们的鲜味(umami: 五种基本味觉之一,常存在于味精、酱油和番茄中)感,也就是你在味精、酱油和番茄中发现的鲜味。
  • 我总是喝番茄汁,但我从不知道为什么。它就是感觉像是我的飞机饮料。或者像辣番茄汁——
  • 是的。
  • 两种都是我的最爱。
  • 是的。
View/Hide Original English

A German survey of a thousand flyers found that more than a quarter of them order tomato juice in flight. And what's really weird is that 23% of those people would never drink it on the ground. And would you drink Bloody Mary, would that be like a standard drink at the bar or is it a special plane drink? - I only have it on planes. So, why is everyone ordering tomato juice? Well, it could be because of the noise. A 2015 study points to the chorda tympani, a nerve that carries taste information from the tongue to the brainstem. It runs right past the eardrum, between the tiny sound conducting bones. So, loud cabin noise might unintentionally stimulate it. This could produce an audio illusion that boosts our sense of umami, the savory taste you find in MSG, soy sauce, and well, tomatoes. - I always drink tomato juice and I never knew why. It just felt like my plane drink. Or like spicy tomato juice- - Yeah. - Like both of those are favorites of mine. - Yeah.

所以,下次你坐飞机时,不妨选择一些特别甜或咸的,或者尝试一下番茄汁。我觉得尽管人们飞行频繁,但我们对飞行的看法仍然相当扭曲。那么,这是为什么呢?

  • 是的。我知道我们经常谈论事故和事件,而且我们深入挖掘它们,人们可能会问:“你为什么要这样做?这难道不会让人们更害怕飞行吗?”但事实是,这是航空业如此安全的主要原因之一。我们有数百名专业人员深入调查这些事故,这意味着我们从中吸取教训。所以,每一次飞行都变得更安全一点。这实际上是我创办“Mentour Pilot”频道的一个重要原因,因为我向你保证,你了解得越多,你就会感觉越安全。
View/Hide Original English

So, next time you're on a flight, go for something extra sweet or salty or maybe try the tomato juice. I feel like with how much people fly, our perspective of flying is still pretty distorted. So, why is that? - Yeah. I know that we talk a lot about accidents and incidents and we dig into them really, really deep and people might ask, "Why would you be doing this? Doesn't that just make people even more afraid of flying?" But the fact is that this is one of the prime reasons why aviation is as safe as it is. The fact that we have hundreds of professionals that dig deep into these accidents means that we learn from them. So, every flight becomes a little bit safer. That's actually a big reason that I started my channel Mentour Pilot in the first place 'cause I promise you, the more you know the safer you'll feel.

航空安全与媒体偏见

你认为气候变化会增加湍流吗?

  • 嗯,这取决于人们对他们观点的看法。
  • 是的。
  • 最近新闻里有点这方面的报道,不是吗? 如今,媒体倾向于优先报道耸人听闻的头条新闻,而不是关键细节。飞行模式至今仍如此受关注的部分原因,就是因为它在20世纪60年代引发的媒体狂热。所以,比以往任何时候都更重要的是,要从故事的所有方面来看待问题。这就是我们特意邀请Ground News赞助本视频的原因。
View/Hide Original English

Do you think that climate change increases turbulence? - Eh, depends on what people think about their opinions. - Yeah. - It's been a bit of that in news recently, hasn't there? Today, the media tends to prioritize sensationalized headlines over key details. Part of why airplane mode is still such a big deal today is because of the media frenzy it started in the 1960s. So it's more important than ever to look at all sides of the story. This is why we specifically asked Ground News to sponsor this video.

最近关于湍流增加的报道来自2023年的一项研究,该研究暗示了与气候变化的联系。然而,这项研究几乎没有被媒体报道,完全被其他重大事件所掩盖。但Ground News让你看到全貌。你可以轻松比较报道并验证信息的来源。如果你仔细观察,你会发现一些媒体,如《独立报》(The Independent)和《南华早报》(SCMP),认为气候变化正在使飞行变得更危险。而另一些媒体,如《自由报》(Free Press),则通过驳斥这项研究来描绘不同的画面。这就是为什么查看所有信息非常重要。但Ground News不仅关注科学和航空等领域的突发新闻,他们还专门展示媒体未报道的盲点故事。Veritasium致力于探求真相,而Ground News的使命是提供每个故事的所有方面,以便我们能够自己做到这一点。

View/Hide Original English

Recent stories about the increase in turbulence come from a 2023 study that suggested a link to climate change. Yet, this study was barely reported on by the media, totally eclipsed by other major events. But Ground News lets you see the whole picture. You can easily compare the coverage and verify the source of the information. If you look closer, you'll see that some of the outlets, like The Independent and the SCMP, argue that climate change is making flying more dangerous. While others like the Free Press paint a different picture by dismissing the study. That's why it's really important to look at all the information. But Ground News doesn't only highlight breaking news on things like science and aviation, they also specifically show blind spot stories the media isn't covering. Veritasium is all about getting to the truth and Ground News' mission is to provide all sides of every story, so that we can do that for ourselves.

所以,我鼓励你去groundnews.com/VER查看他们。链接在下方,或者你可以扫描这个二维码。请务必通过我们的链接订阅,以节省40%的无限访问费用。通过支持Ground News,你不仅获得了一个我们现在比以往任何时候都更需要的工具,而且你还直接支持了这个频道和我们目前的工作。所以,我要感谢Ground News赞助本视频,也要感谢你的观看。

View/Hide Original English

So, I encourage you to check them out at groundnews.com/VER. The link is below or you can scan this QR code. Make sure to subscribe through our link to save 40% off unlimited access. And by supporting Ground News, you're not only getting a tool we need now more than ever, but you're directly supporting this channel and our work in the meantime. So, I wanna thank Ground News for sponsoring this video and I want to thank you for watching.

📌 文中提及的人物和组织

公司/组织: FAA, FCC, Boeing, Airbus, Ground News

产品/模型: 5G

媒体/书籍: Veritasium, Mentour Pilot, Ground News