[tssge]

Sarcasm aside, while still not acceptable, some people might not have the means to buy new items to replace what they lost in a crash. So it is understandable for some people to make the choice of taking their luggage with them in such an event, as they might not have the wealth and/or insurance necessary to replace those items afterwards.

Of course the solution would be to make airlines liable to replace passengers' luggage in the event of a crash and inform the passengers that they will do so, but that's not how the world works currently.

[wqaatwt]

> liable to replace passengers' luggage

Aren’t they? AFAIK it’s standard (if not required?) for airlines to have insurance which includes passenger legal liability.

Were there any recent crashes where passengers weren’t compensated? e.g. after US Airways 1549 everyone received at minimum $5k (or higher depending on damages) for lost luggage.

edit: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/205.5

[tssge]

In general the airlines just ask you to leave your luggage. If they were legally obliged to replace all your items, they would inform you of such.

On international flights, an airline is liable for up to $1700 per the Montreal Convention. This might cover say half of one's laptop, which no matter how stupid it sounds, makes taking your luggage with you the only financially sensible choice in a crash (unless you have insurance). Now obviously such an event has other priorities than just financial ones, but it's no surprise if people choose to take their luggage with them.

On US domestic flights the amount is somewhat higher, $4700. However even this might not be enough for some. On EU domestic flights it's 1800€.

Airlines however are free to pay any amount they want, but they are not legally required to pay more than the limits set by law. So it is possible you will be reimbursed in full, but you wouldn't know that beforehand.

[michaelt]

In terms of explaining the passenger's behaviour, though - presumably they didn't know this, and didn't have time to research it on their phone during the crash.

Airline customer service standards are very low; I can see how a person making the decision based on just their experience with airlines would conclude it was better to grab their carry-on if it was safe to do so.

[Cthulhu_]

> Sarcasm aside, while still not acceptable, some people might not have the means to buy new items to replace what they lost in a crash. So it is understandable for some people to make the choice of taking their luggage with them in such an event, as they might not have the wealth and/or insurance necessary to replace those items afterwards.

One person's means are not more important than the lives of the people on board. Stuff can be replaced; get everyone to safety first, then worry about stuff.

And yeah airlines are liable to replace stuff in the event of a crash and pay for damages if it's their fault. If it's the fault of the airplane manufacturer, they will have to; Boeing paid out billions to all parties involved in accidents and groundings of the 737 max:

> On January 7, 2021, Boeing settled to pay over $2.5 billion after being charged with fraud over the company's hiding of information from safety regulators: a criminal monetary penalty of $243.6 million, $1.77 billion of damages to airline customers, and a $500 million crash-victim beneficiaries fund.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_impact_of_the_Boeing...

[7952]

They might even need clean underwear and have that in mind. Probably the most scary experience of their lives and people act strangely.

[account42]

Still not a rational decision. Poopypants > crispy skin.

[prmoustache]

You really only have to keep your important papers in your pants pockets.

[account42]

Would be easier if airplane seats weren't as cramped.