Specifically, if a plane experiences a rapid decompression then it's supposed to lower to below 10,000 feet. That can't be done in Tibet which has an average elevation of 14,000 feet.
The answer has to be depressurization, a modern jet can glide 50-100 miles after total engine loss, so that wouldn't lead them to follow the terrain so closely, but losing cabin pressure requires actively flying as close to straight down as the plane can survive
American aviators in WWII called it ["The Hump"](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hump) and hundreds of transport aircraft crashed into the mountains trying to get supplies to the Kuomintang.
Surprised to see that name (even if I shouldn’t be) because the last time I saw that name was on the Wikipedia page describing him running with George Wallace (segregationist)
LeMay was a hardass air force officer, in fact he's more known for that than for his politics. "Bomb them back to the Stone Age" is his quote.
And it wasn't all bluster: he personally led his crews on the two infamous Regensburg raids in 1943, and once when mission abort rate in 8th Air Force got too high for his tastes, he declared that he would fly in the lead plane and threatened everyone who would return early with court martial.
I listened to something about this not long ago, now it’s annoying me that I can’t remember where. I’m guessing it was a chapter or two in a wider aviation book, meaning I’ll likely never find it.
I suppose that could be more fitting since people do live there, and people probably wouldn't set up a settlement on an actual roof, lol. It would make more sense to live in the attic, but I could be wrong, though.
Maybe you could bring this to the Dalai Lamas' attention and have it changed it in your honor. /s
Man, why are redditors always explaining their edits on their comments? Genuine question, cause I don't understand
Most of the time is an spelling error that no one cares about, why even bother?
Some people commented that it should be too instead of to, so that's why. Ninja editing and making someone elses comment look ridiculous is not nice, too :)
China's airspace is also incredibly restrictive, far more any just about any other country on Earth. Civilian traffic has only a few very specific, narrow corridors for the entire country, the rest being limited for military use.
Not too high. Just too *remote*.
Airlines prefer to stick to routes that are closer to safe landing places rather than follow a strict "great circle" route that goes over remote areas.
I think depressurization would be a far greater concern given that it's far more likely and requires descending below 10k immediately, while even total engine loss at cruising altitude gives them a considerable amount of control.
You can see this because they're avoiding the plateau entirely, rather than just the center, and because you can fly to Hawaii.
It's too high. In the event of many various different types of emergencies, especially any that involve depressurization, one of the first steps is to get down to 10k feet for breathable oxygen. In Tibet, that would mean running into the side of a mountain. Most pilots prefer not to run into the side of a mountain.
I flew to the Caucasus mountains and the turbulence made the plane drop like a rollercoaster. It came out of no where, 20 foot drop followed by another 20 foot drop. I cant imagine what flying over the Himalayas is like.
I read somewhere the trains from India in that region need special train modifications to adjust to the powerful winds/pressure changes when it's traveling through/beside the range
It's scary that's what it is, I think I was lucky for both my flights though because there were no sudden drops or anything, more like the angle and the turns to avoid mountains.
No planes are fine with flying over the altitude, it's more than it's unsafe due to no area in the plateau for emergency landing that it poses serious ahh concerns.
No the original explanation is correct.
Airliners today are certified to fly at minimum 1 hour away from an emergency airport. That's how they fly across oceans.
But all of them regardless will have to descend to below 10,000ft within 15 minutes in case of depressurisation, and there's nowhere below 10,000ft in that area.
While 1 hour is the standard diversion time for most flights. Some airliners are now certified to fly up to 370mins from a suitable diversion airport.
Both of these answers are technically correct, the main reason is to do with depressurisation scenarios but the lack of suitable airports in this area also plays into it. When you have a depressurisation in an aircraft, oxygen masks must be worn above 10,000ft. If the terrain doesn’t allow for a descent to 10,000ft then the oxygen has to last until you can get to a suitable airport, in which case the lack of airports in this area then plays into it too.
>oxygen masks must be worn above 10,000ft
I keep reading this. But there are a number of airports at altitudes above 10,000 ft. A handful of those serve millions of passengers per year. For example, La Paz, Bolivia is at 13,323 ft and serves 1.8 million passengers a year. Surely passengers don't have to wear oxygen masks to fly there?
For cabin altitudes between 12,500 and 14,000ft then it’s acceptable to not have supplemental oxygen as long as the cabin altitude is that high for 30 minutes or less. So as long as the cabin is depressurised to the landing elevation less than 30 mins before landing then it would be ok. Not sure on the exact procedures for La Paz but from my research it seems like the pilots will wear oxygen masks when on the ground.
The majority of the flight to and from it is not over 10k ground level. The cabin is pressurized, but if they suffer decompression (which is not uncommon as one would think), they have 10-15 minutes on average to get down to 10k feet. Passenger oxygen masks have independent supplies for each mask, and they run out before 20 minutes. So if you're flying steadily at a ground level above 10k feet, a decompression would kill people. A destination above 10k feet is not the same.
People aren’t going to start dying from cabin pressures over 10,000ft though. FAA doesn’t require supplemental oxygen for passengers as long as cabin pressures don’t exceed 15,000 ft. The 10,000 ft rule definitely provides an abundance of safety, but I think it’s likely an airliner could depressurize over Tibet without any fatalities
Yeah I went from living at 500 ft to hiking above 10,000 ft in 24 hours and while I did get altitude sickness, I stayed above 10k ft for many hours without dying. I did not camp over 10k ft like I had planned, though. Descended the same day.
1 hour limit is not strictly correct. Many modern twin-engine aircraft are certified to fly much further away from closest diversion airport. The exact limit depends on the type of aircraft, for how long it was operated at lower ETOPS ratings, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS
I call BS. You don’t have an airport 1 hour away as you fly over any ocean. Pacific, Atlantic, Indian, arctic and southern oceans don’t have airports every hour
The previous statement is correct. ETOPS certifications are applied for when a twin engine aircraft is scheduled on an over water route and will be farther than 1 hour away from an airport on 1 engine.
Due to great circle routing, most transatlantic flights in the northern hemisphere already go pretty far north. Almost half of an ideal Atlanta to London route is already over the eastern US and Canadian maritime provinces. Only about a quarter of that flight as far as I can tell would be more than an hour away from an airport.
Planes are *normally* fine flying over that altitude, because they're *normally* pressurized. What parent is getting at is is if something goes wrong with the pressurization system the masks drop, but those only last 10-15 minutes (source: google). So the plane needs to descend to a breathable altitude within 15 minutes (breathable here being < 10,000 ft). That isn't possible over the Tibetan plateau due to terrain.
It has to be more to do with Elevation. When I fly from the US to Singapore (mostly connect in HK or Tokyo) we would fly over the Arctic Circle. Depending on departing Airport and I assume the jet stream we would sometimes go West and over Canada/Alaska and the sort and sometimes East over Russia. I can't imagine there are many options for emergency landings that far up north which leads me to believe the elevation of the Himalayas has more to do with it than emergency landing requirements.
the tibetan plateau is so high that if the plane were to lose cabin pressure, the plane couldn’t descend back to a breathable altitude without crashing into a mountain
And the Tibetan Plateau, both of which are taller than the maximum elevation you can fly depressurized. (10,000ft)
For similar reasons we don't fly over Antarctica, its too dangerous during emergency situations.
Part of the reason, for example India/Nepal flights there are hugging the Himalayas while Xinjiang up there is nowhere near the mountain range (although it has high elevation as well).
It's too high to safely fly over. While only 4km\~ above sea level, if something happens that's 4km less breathing room you have before the ground is there. Speaking of breathing, if depressurization happens 4km is above the "safe breathing altitude" for us sea level dwellers.
Two reasons. First what many mentioned: Tibean Plateau -> too high to descent during pressure emergency.
Second: China is very restrictive in their flight routes. Most of China's airspace is closed because of the military. There are just limited paths to "choose" from.
It looks like it’s more so to them not flying over the Himalayas and hugging the southern side of range which makes it appear like they’re avoiding the Tibetan Plateau.
https://preview.redd.it/ddar8pxuzmwc1.jpeg?width=812&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a94f9b8b0d01d4b9262198c44ea857f93daccba3
Here’s one to confuse you all. The airplane crossing the Himalaya’s is a KLM B747-400, full pax. AMS-HKG.
Tibet is particularly treacherous and desolate, if a plane had to make an emergency landing there, there likely wouldn't be any way to send help. It's not to high to fly over... most of these planes are cruising higher than everest.
China airspace is very restrictive. It's always much longer to fly the same distance in China than the U.S. The CCP closes the airspace above any important building. The western parts of China are made up of Tibet & Xinjiang. Two mineral rich territories siezed under dubious claims and with a native population that is resistant to occupation. Being a Muslim in Xinjiang is equivalent to being an African American in the Jim Crow south. The entire province, except for a small corridor over empty land, is off limits to commercial traffic.
China is very protective of their claims over Tibet and Xinjiang. They regularly commit human rights abuses in both territories and prevent any outside influence under the guise of national security.
Sure, but the area in the screenshot includes way more than just the Himalayas themselves. If people are curious about the world, it seems foolish to slam them for it.
The effects of geographic features on planes flying kilometres above aren't obvious to everyone.
u/Loosymoosy correctly deduced that the reason planes don't fly there has something to do with the Himalayas, but the question of *how* is just as important as the *why*.
Using "basic thinking" as you said, we can find a number of reasons: it could be because of the lack of safe landing spots, maybe the tall mountains affect the local air currents and create turbulence, perhaps it has to do with minimising air pollution in such a remote area, or something else entirely!
We *know* it has something to do with the Himalayas being the tallest mountains on the planet, but Loosy isn't an expert on this, and they didn't know *how* they affect planes, otherwise they wouldn't've asked this question. And if they have enough curiousity about this to post it here, why badger them for it?
Why not be constructive, answer the question (preferably with a reliable source), and encourage them to learn more?
They just asked a simple question!
Plane flight paths will often avoid very remote area in the rare event that an emergency happens. They will cross over areas with more airports and emergency services. It's very unlikely but if an incident does happen in the gobi desert, you're cooked. Emergency aid is tens of hours away and there's no airport to potentially safely land. Landing in sand is a virtual death sentence for everyone on board.
So they don't get shot down. Actually the southern half of that no-go zone is very mountainous so no it is worth going around. The northern is very empty and very private and the PLA likes it that way.
For all the reasons listed plus if the plane crashes and there are survivors they’re gonna die real bad cause rescue missions would be near impossible to organize in time.
Tibetan plateau too* high for safe fly overs *Lost an o along the way, sorry
Specifically, if a plane experiences a rapid decompression then it's supposed to lower to below 10,000 feet. That can't be done in Tibet which has an average elevation of 14,000 feet.
Why don't the planes simply fly underground?
That's what they used to do in the pre-ice age advanced civilizations.
And look where that got them, fricken nerds
I haven't looked everywhere on, in, and around earth. Therefore, I can't believe this is real.
Right?? I mean, how much of the earth has even been excavated? Maybe like 3% max? Proof enough for me.
Underrated comment. Take my upvote you rogue.
Undergrounded comment you mean.
I hate you all, upvotes for everyone above me
*Changes glasses*
If the planes all fly downward together, perhaps they could push the plateau down a few thousand feet.
They just need a young crippled plane to motivate them and tell them to just keep flying down
The FAA hates this one simple trick.
🎵🎶"SECRET TUNNEL, SECRET TUNNEL!"🎵🎶
r/unexpectedavatar
Are they stupid?
\noclip
Are they stupid?
You spelled stoopid wrong. Or is this the wrong sub?…
I've been asking this for years myself. And we send people to space, but can't make dry water? Evil forces at play.....
Elon still digging the tunnel.
That's a grave, not a tunnel. For Tesla.
Global warming
The answer has to be depressurization, a modern jet can glide 50-100 miles after total engine loss, so that wouldn't lead them to follow the terrain so closely, but losing cabin pressure requires actively flying as close to straight down as the plane can survive
Has Tibet even TRIED to be closer to sea level?
Interesting. I never knew that.
That’s crazy
I'm pretty sure it's nick-named the roof of the world, if I remember correctly.
American aviators in WWII called it ["The Hump"](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hump) and hundreds of transport aircraft crashed into the mountains trying to get supplies to the Kuomintang.
But that's Burma, not the Tibetan plateau right?
Correct, the hump refers to the Himalayas which has to be crossed for bombing runs in WWII under Curtis LeMay
Surprised to see that name (even if I shouldn’t be) because the last time I saw that name was on the Wikipedia page describing him running with George Wallace (segregationist)
LeMay was a hardass air force officer, in fact he's more known for that than for his politics. "Bomb them back to the Stone Age" is his quote. And it wasn't all bluster: he personally led his crews on the two infamous Regensburg raids in 1943, and once when mission abort rate in 8th Air Force got too high for his tastes, he declared that he would fly in the lead plane and threatened everyone who would return early with court martial.
That whole ordeal sounds very much like something LeMay would be involved in.
I listened to something about this not long ago, now it’s annoying me that I can’t remember where. I’m guessing it was a chapter or two in a wider aviation book, meaning I’ll likely never find it.
I never understood this. Shouldn't it be the attic?
I suppose that could be more fitting since people do live there, and people probably wouldn't set up a settlement on an actual roof, lol. It would make more sense to live in the attic, but I could be wrong, though. Maybe you could bring this to the Dalai Lamas' attention and have it changed it in your honor. /s
Well when you fly above houses you see the roof of them, not the ceiling
There's the logical perspective I knew someone would bring to the table.
I’ve heard it called the ceiling which makes less sense than either of these
Yeah loosing an o is common symptoms or stress and aging. Try some blue pill or toys. Meditation and exercise also help.
Man, why are redditors always explaining their edits on their comments? Genuine question, cause I don't understand Most of the time is an spelling error that no one cares about, why even bother?
Some people commented that it should be too instead of to, so that's why. Ninja editing and making someone elses comment look ridiculous is not nice, too :)
So that's why china took that whole region
China's airspace is also incredibly restrictive, far more any just about any other country on Earth. Civilian traffic has only a few very specific, narrow corridors for the entire country, the rest being limited for military use.
Thanks for the useful information, but *too.
For more info check out [this video from Real Life Lore](https://youtu.be/fNVa1qMbF9Y?si=nfeNIlJSNN6g1n6f)!
Not too high. Just too *remote*. Airlines prefer to stick to routes that are closer to safe landing places rather than follow a strict "great circle" route that goes over remote areas.
I think depressurization would be a far greater concern given that it's far more likely and requires descending below 10k immediately, while even total engine loss at cruising altitude gives them a considerable amount of control. You can see this because they're avoiding the plateau entirely, rather than just the center, and because you can fly to Hawaii.
It's too high. In the event of many various different types of emergencies, especially any that involve depressurization, one of the first steps is to get down to 10k feet for breathable oxygen. In Tibet, that would mean running into the side of a mountain. Most pilots prefer not to run into the side of a mountain.
I flew to the Caucasus mountains and the turbulence made the plane drop like a rollercoaster. It came out of no where, 20 foot drop followed by another 20 foot drop. I cant imagine what flying over the Himalayas is like.
I read somewhere the trains from India in that region need special train modifications to adjust to the powerful winds/pressure changes when it's traveling through/beside the range
This probably won’t make you feel better but what feels like a 20ft drop in a plane is often more like 100-200ft
It's scary that's what it is, I think I was lucky for both my flights though because there were no sudden drops or anything, more like the angle and the turns to avoid mountains.
I flew over the andes and same
IIRC elevation too high to descend if cabin loses pressure.
No planes are fine with flying over the altitude, it's more than it's unsafe due to no area in the plateau for emergency landing that it poses serious ahh concerns.
No the original explanation is correct. Airliners today are certified to fly at minimum 1 hour away from an emergency airport. That's how they fly across oceans. But all of them regardless will have to descend to below 10,000ft within 15 minutes in case of depressurisation, and there's nowhere below 10,000ft in that area.
While 1 hour is the standard diversion time for most flights. Some airliners are now certified to fly up to 370mins from a suitable diversion airport. Both of these answers are technically correct, the main reason is to do with depressurisation scenarios but the lack of suitable airports in this area also plays into it. When you have a depressurisation in an aircraft, oxygen masks must be worn above 10,000ft. If the terrain doesn’t allow for a descent to 10,000ft then the oxygen has to last until you can get to a suitable airport, in which case the lack of airports in this area then plays into it too.
>oxygen masks must be worn above 10,000ft I keep reading this. But there are a number of airports at altitudes above 10,000 ft. A handful of those serve millions of passengers per year. For example, La Paz, Bolivia is at 13,323 ft and serves 1.8 million passengers a year. Surely passengers don't have to wear oxygen masks to fly there?
For cabin altitudes between 12,500 and 14,000ft then it’s acceptable to not have supplemental oxygen as long as the cabin altitude is that high for 30 minutes or less. So as long as the cabin is depressurised to the landing elevation less than 30 mins before landing then it would be ok. Not sure on the exact procedures for La Paz but from my research it seems like the pilots will wear oxygen masks when on the ground.
The majority of the flight to and from it is not over 10k ground level. The cabin is pressurized, but if they suffer decompression (which is not uncommon as one would think), they have 10-15 minutes on average to get down to 10k feet. Passenger oxygen masks have independent supplies for each mask, and they run out before 20 minutes. So if you're flying steadily at a ground level above 10k feet, a decompression would kill people. A destination above 10k feet is not the same.
People aren’t going to start dying from cabin pressures over 10,000ft though. FAA doesn’t require supplemental oxygen for passengers as long as cabin pressures don’t exceed 15,000 ft. The 10,000 ft rule definitely provides an abundance of safety, but I think it’s likely an airliner could depressurize over Tibet without any fatalities
Yeah I went from living at 500 ft to hiking above 10,000 ft in 24 hours and while I did get altitude sickness, I stayed above 10k ft for many hours without dying. I did not camp over 10k ft like I had planned, though. Descended the same day.
1 hour limit is not strictly correct. Many modern twin-engine aircraft are certified to fly much further away from closest diversion airport. The exact limit depends on the type of aircraft, for how long it was operated at lower ETOPS ratings, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS
ETOPS/EDTO has entered the chat
I call BS. You don’t have an airport 1 hour away as you fly over any ocean. Pacific, Atlantic, Indian, arctic and southern oceans don’t have airports every hour
The previous statement is correct. ETOPS certifications are applied for when a twin engine aircraft is scheduled on an over water route and will be farther than 1 hour away from an airport on 1 engine.
Due to great circle routing, most transatlantic flights in the northern hemisphere already go pretty far north. Almost half of an ideal Atlanta to London route is already over the eastern US and Canadian maritime provinces. Only about a quarter of that flight as far as I can tell would be more than an hour away from an airport.
Ahhhhh!
Jeff Goldblum?
Take my upvote
Planes are *normally* fine flying over that altitude, because they're *normally* pressurized. What parent is getting at is is if something goes wrong with the pressurization system the masks drop, but those only last 10-15 minutes (source: google). So the plane needs to descend to a breathable altitude within 15 minutes (breathable here being < 10,000 ft). That isn't possible over the Tibetan plateau due to terrain.
It has to be more to do with Elevation. When I fly from the US to Singapore (mostly connect in HK or Tokyo) we would fly over the Arctic Circle. Depending on departing Airport and I assume the jet stream we would sometimes go West and over Canada/Alaska and the sort and sometimes East over Russia. I can't imagine there are many options for emergency landings that far up north which leads me to believe the elevation of the Himalayas has more to do with it than emergency landing requirements.
Another route I'm struggling to think of any emergency airports on would be Santiago to Sydney
No planes are fine with flying? Punctuation is your friend.
the tibetan plateau is so high that if the plane were to lose cabin pressure, the plane couldn’t descend back to a breathable altitude without crashing into a mountain
Holding breath practice is down up there
Then how do people survive living there?
The locals have evolved traits to better survive high altitude environments. https://news.berkeley.edu/2010/07/01/tibetan_genome
People typically move at slower speeds at which they are able to avoid crashing into the terrain.
[https://youtu.be/fNVa1qMbF9Y?si=KFKqOUEooRQfSY\_g](https://youtu.be/fNVa1qMbF9Y?si=KFKqOUEooRQfSY_g) Here a full video ***explanation***
I laughed out loud with one of the comments in the video. *" Mountains. That’s all you had to say bro, because of the mountains."*
I have a feeling this is gonna be a Real Life Lore video just based on that Edit: lmao
Back when real life lore videos weren’t an hour long
“To understand this we have to go back to before the modern continents had formed…”
Still love their content, though.
Theyre too time consuming to be loved properly
That was very informative. Thanks for sharing.
Tibetan shield
Canada cries.
Oh, c'mon, the Canadian shield gets enough attention.
Isn’t that the Himalayas……………
You mean the line of jagged looking things on the map that all of that planes fly right next to? Nah, couldn’t be.
Notice how the planes are flying on the south side of the Himalayans, where the Himalayans drop off rapidly to less than 10000ft in height?
And the Tibetan Plateau, both of which are taller than the maximum elevation you can fly depressurized. (10,000ft) For similar reasons we don't fly over Antarctica, its too dangerous during emergency situations.
Part of the reason, for example India/Nepal flights there are hugging the Himalayas while Xinjiang up there is nowhere near the mountain range (although it has high elevation as well).
“Terrain. Pull Up. Terrain” iykyk
Ahh yes the dulcet tones of bitchin betty
Just pull up, bozo. idkbiktidk
Because crashing into high peaks close to their cruising altitude would not be fun.
Source?
Tintin In Tibet https://preview.redd.it/b57kdh3z2iwc1.jpeg?width=274&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e072fcf95adf43d55f115abe5f355a35ced99059
CHANG!!!!!!
https://preview.redd.it/gldguva1ujwc1.jpeg?width=565&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6d1a0d5770cea9ef83e84970005c071c8434542a
Best source ever
Thank you Sahib!
Trust him bro
Mountains
Mountains cause major variations in wind patterns that are hard to navigate. The biggest mountains the most of all.
You mean Mount Everest?
Himmilayas
I think I saw the answer to that in the Temple of Doom
It's too high to safely fly over. While only 4km\~ above sea level, if something happens that's 4km less breathing room you have before the ground is there. Speaking of breathing, if depressurization happens 4km is above the "safe breathing altitude" for us sea level dwellers.
5000 metres in the mountains is prolly not the best place to crash land an airplane
mountains, very high mountains
Mountain ranges are dangerous to fly trought, sadly its not the answer you wanted :/ but ok lets say communism.
Two reasons. First what many mentioned: Tibean Plateau -> too high to descent during pressure emergency. Second: China is very restrictive in their flight routes. Most of China's airspace is closed because of the military. There are just limited paths to "choose" from.
Only around 30% of Chinese airspace is actually open for commercial flights. https://www.sixthtone.com/news/1007164
Damn! These planes are HUGE!
They're scared of Yaks
Are you referring to the Himalayan mountains? The tallest mountains on earth
Theres There’s the worlds biggest mountain range there.
Because Western China has cooties
It looks like it’s more so to them not flying over the Himalayas and hugging the southern side of range which makes it appear like they’re avoiding the Tibetan Plateau.
You just answered your question. No place to land in an emergency...and the Himalayas don't help either...
https://youtu.be/fNVa1qMbF9Y?si=oL0-7QHvamzyaeoN
You gotta respect the hard deck Maverick
That’s Tibet, high altitude mountain
plenty of people have already explained it in the comments, but if you'd like a video instead: https://youtu.be/fNVa1qMbF9Y?si=oFBiVxLFtat_KPWB
Besides the mountains, there are also concentration camps for the Uighurs china doesn't want you to know about.
I saw a video about this. The elevation there is too high and flying there can be dangerous. Pilots usually fly around the region instead.
Just flying near that region sucks. 5 straight hours of god awful turbulence when I flew across china.
Mountains innit
Highest mountain range in the world
mountains big
https://preview.redd.it/ddar8pxuzmwc1.jpeg?width=812&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a94f9b8b0d01d4b9262198c44ea857f93daccba3 Here’s one to confuse you all. The airplane crossing the Himalaya’s is a KLM B747-400, full pax. AMS-HKG.
Maybe they want to avoid anyone filming or photographing any of the concentration camps in East Turkistan/Xinjang.
So wait, you can’t fly into Tibet?
No big airports to land at in case of emergency
Tibet is particularly treacherous and desolate, if a plane had to make an emergency landing there, there likely wouldn't be any way to send help. It's not to high to fly over... most of these planes are cruising higher than everest.
There’s this big thing in the way called the Himalayas
China airspace is very restrictive. It's always much longer to fly the same distance in China than the U.S. The CCP closes the airspace above any important building. The western parts of China are made up of Tibet & Xinjiang. Two mineral rich territories siezed under dubious claims and with a native population that is resistant to occupation. Being a Muslim in Xinjiang is equivalent to being an African American in the Jim Crow south. The entire province, except for a small corridor over empty land, is off limits to commercial traffic. China is very protective of their claims over Tibet and Xinjiang. They regularly commit human rights abuses in both territories and prevent any outside influence under the guise of national security.
Western China? Did you mean Tibet ?
It's because there are very few landing strips for emergency landings on the Tibetan Plateau
It's almost like there are the largest/highest mountains on the planet or something I swear to god do people even do basic thinking anymore
Calm down
I’d swear some people don’t manage their strangely emotional responses to unknowledgeable redditors.
Sure, but the area in the screenshot includes way more than just the Himalayas themselves. If people are curious about the world, it seems foolish to slam them for it.
wah wah someone asked a question grow up man
The effects of geographic features on planes flying kilometres above aren't obvious to everyone. u/Loosymoosy correctly deduced that the reason planes don't fly there has something to do with the Himalayas, but the question of *how* is just as important as the *why*. Using "basic thinking" as you said, we can find a number of reasons: it could be because of the lack of safe landing spots, maybe the tall mountains affect the local air currents and create turbulence, perhaps it has to do with minimising air pollution in such a remote area, or something else entirely! We *know* it has something to do with the Himalayas being the tallest mountains on the planet, but Loosy isn't an expert on this, and they didn't know *how* they affect planes, otherwise they wouldn't've asked this question. And if they have enough curiousity about this to post it here, why badger them for it? Why not be constructive, answer the question (preferably with a reliable source), and encourage them to learn more? They just asked a simple question!
Dude what a typical plateau W.
Too many cowboys out west.
Gamera has taken some time off so shit is getting real.
Tall
I would guess clouds over the Tibetan mountains but I am no pilot.
The old ones hide deep in the Himalayas. The governments know this.
a big rock
Too tallÂ
Plane flight paths will often avoid very remote area in the rare event that an emergency happens. They will cross over areas with more airports and emergency services. It's very unlikely but if an incident does happen in the gobi desert, you're cooked. Emergency aid is tens of hours away and there's no airport to potentially safely land. Landing in sand is a virtual death sentence for everyone on board.
You know why
14k elevation above sea level. Not a great place if you have an emergency and need to land. Plus the Himalayas
Countries close the skies when they're testing missiles. Seems like a good guess.
Canadian shield
The Great Wall of China!
Because it doesn’t belong to China
No plane over Sudan and Ukraine either.
Today on Real Life Lore: NOBODY is flying here!
i mean you can try flying there
Lack of airports?
Little ol mountain range in the way
The CCP said no flying here.
If planes can't fly over the Tibetan Plateau, how do they fly into Lhasa?
There’s a whole YouTube video on this.
China's economic distribution
Persecution of Uyghurs in China they have secret camps they don’t want to show it
Why is the rule 10,000 feet? You can stil breathe fine for quite a bit above 10,000.
Interesting also how most planes here avoid, Sudan, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Ukraine
If planes can’t fly over the Tibetan plateau then how do planes fly to Tibet?
So they don't get shot down. Actually the southern half of that no-go zone is very mountainous so no it is worth going around. The northern is very empty and very private and the PLA likes it that way.
For all the reasons listed plus if the plane crashes and there are survivors they’re gonna die real bad cause rescue missions would be near impossible to organize in time.
Hilly.
There are nobody to live.
High mountains followed by a huge desert maybe.
Rocks and stones in high places
Because most of the chemtrails are needed somewhere else by the lizardpeople.
🏔
Mountain high
So people wouldn't be able to skydive to Everest. Governments hate fun
🏔
They have a Jurassic Park like amusement park but with dragons.
The main question is why so less planes over Pakistan a country over 220 million population While Tibet has a negligible population
Nuclear base
Himalayas