What is the probability of being stung by a bee or eating a bag of nuts between your seat, the slide, and the ambulances rushing to the scene to rescue people?
Otherwise by this logic, just about everyone has a reason to self-justify needing to get into their luggage in an emergency evacuation event.
Target to evacuate planes in an emergency is 90 seconds. Contrast with regular deplaning with luggage which takes upwards of 15 minutes. So the plane must evacuate at 10x speed in order to save lives.
The bag I have is about the size of two croissants — I keep it under seat in front of me or in my lap.
But this topic has inspired me to improve my process, so I would like to find a money belt or shoulder holster style bag to carry meds and epi while traveling. Basically body hugging.
Any help in finding something that isn’t from Temu, or some random drop shipper? I found one eagle creek bag but would prefer a shoulder style?
But you might just die in the fire yourself, prioritizing a hypothetical emergency over a real one. There would also be plenty of medical personnel present once you get off the plane, they probably won't let you leave the scene without talking to one.
The Two Failure Fallacy is a fatal flaw of human reasoning. It's almost never correct to engineer anything on the assumption of two bad things happening simultaneously. You do your analysis based on individual/uncorrelated failure modes. And only then do you make design choices (c.f. "defense in depth", "redundancy", etc...) about how much the interactions overlap and what the tradeoffs are.
In this case, duh. Positing that emergency medical personnel are somehow unable to handle an allergy attack is silly.
I’m not convinced that medical personnel would be on hand that quickly for all emergency landings — sure if you are at a major airport. But they may not notice someone who collapsed after being triaged away from the more severely injured.
May I introduce you to Fault Tree Analysis? NUREG 0492
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/...
One result of that is to show that there are no double failures with common cause, rather than just assuming that to be true.
Other areas of engineering aren't nearly so advanced, c.f. Fukushima, which happened because of the converse failure: the designers treated two failures (power grid failure and flooded backup generators) as uncorrelated and independent when they weren't (because tsunamis follow earthquakes).