Trick to avoid jet lag: no eating on the flight?

[brahmanknight]

Is this true? I didn't eat on the two transcontinental flight I've had, but I still got jet lag on the flight from SF.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ver-eat-food-on-planes-and-other-jet-set-tips


The cabin crew’s secret to avoiding jet lag.

I eat nothing on flights. I’ve talked to a lot of stewardesses about it, and it’s a stewardess secret. Ten years ago, it was [a cabin crew member] on Singapore Airlines on what was, at the time, the longest flight in the world (17 hours from Singapore to New York). She told me that her tried-and-true trick was not eating in-flight. Basically, at superhigh altitude, your digestive system shuts down completely. Someone said to me it’s like being under anesthesia. So when you get off the plane, everything restarts and [your digestive system] has so much more work to do and so it makes you more tired.

 

[NinjaKnight]

The secret is go/no-go pills.

Unfortunately meth is illegal for civilians. Next best thing is adjusting your circadian rhythm by controlling light exposure, shifting your wake/sleep times ahead of time. I've also read about eye drops helping, they definitely help with the dry air at 40k.

 

[Knight_Light]

East to West, no problems.

West to East? (Especially from Hawaii or beyond) Just give up, you are screwed.

 

[CommuterBob]

East to West, no problems.

West to East? (Especially from Hawaii or beyond) Just give up, you are screwed.

This.

About the only thing that could possibly help on the West to East is if you are one of those people who can actually sleep on a plane and take an evening flight (or one that lands in EST around 1-2 AM). That way you can at least get to a bed and get some horizontal sleep before starting the next day. Taking the redeye (landing around 8-9 AM) is horrible, unless you can possibly take 2-3 hours during that 1st day and take a nap. .

 

[NinjaKnight]

This.

About the only thing that could possibly help on the West to East is if you are one of those people who can actually sleep on a plane and take an evening flight (or one that lands in EST around 1-2 AM). That way you can at least get to a bed and get some horizontal sleep before starting the next day. Taking the redeye (landing around 8-9 AM) is horrible, unless you can possibly take 2-3 hours during that 1st day and take a nap. .

Naps are the devil, you will not make it if you try to nap going W-E. Just power through. Sleeping on the plane is great if you are riding as pax, usually frowned upon if you are on the flight deck.

 

[CommuterBob]

Naps are the devil, you will not make it if you try to nap going W-E. Just power through. Sleeping on the plane is great if you are riding as pax, usually frowned upon if you are on the flight deck.

That's what autopilot and co-pilots are for.

 

[UCF11and1]

This.

About the only thing that could possibly help on the West to East is if you are one of those people who can actually sleep on a plane and take an evening flight (or one that lands in EST around 1-2 AM). That way you can at least get to a bed and get some horizontal sleep before starting the next day. Taking the redeye (landing around 8-9 AM) is horrible, unless you can possibly take 2-3 hours during that 1st day and take a nap. .

Amateurs. Just went to Europe, left at 6 pm DST and landed at 9 am local (3 am DST). The trick is to get a couple hours of sleep in the plane and stay up until it is dark and go to sleep. I slept probably 1 hour in the plane and then stayed up until 9 pm local (3 pm DST). No problems the next day

 

[chemmie]

Just did NYC to Hong Kong. 15+ hours, followed by another 3 hour flight to Jakarta. 12 hour difference. Going over took about 2 days to reacclimate. Coming back took about 4. All the sleeping in the world couldn't help my body out. The best thing for comfort on an ultra long haul is lounge access, though. A shower feels like a million bucks after a flight like that.

 

[Great2BAKnight2]

That's what autopilot and co-pilots are for.

Most accidents are due to human error, not computer malfunctions.

 

[sk8knight]

Agree with W to E being no problem. I can easily adjust on trips to SE Asia or even Australia. It's coming back that is hard. Eating/not eating on the flight is immaterial and often impossible.

The best plan I've had is to look at where I'm going and try to adjust to the time zone during the travel. If I'm coming home W to E, I look at the United Seoul - SFO - MCO trip that arrives in Orlando after midnight. I try to sleep on the inbound to SFO and then stay up as much as possible so that I crash when I get home. Going to Seoul, we get in around 5 or 6 pm, so that flight I won't sleep much so that I'm somewhat tired when I get there.

 

[UCFBS]

Most accidents are due to human error, not computer malfunctions.

Huh?

There is a combination of many factors, including improper procedures that are very much automated. Just because it's marked "human factor" or "pilot error" doesn't necessarily mean it was the pilot's fault.

Incorrect charts, systems, unfamiliarity, inappropriate usage, etc... can often be a major, major issue ... including improperly using the automated system, failing to calibrate it, etc... If there is one consistency to automation, it is this ...

They won't tell you when you're using them wrong ... and will gleefully not stop you from killing yourself, and others with you.

The Tesla autopilot is a perfect example. It is quite incapable of autonomous driving. Anyone who says otherwise ... including Tesla's own marketing ... is guilty of that. I have this conversation constantly with non-engineers who claim to be 'tech savvy.'

 

[chemmie]

Huh?

There is a combination of many factors, including improper procedures that are very much automated. Just because it's marked "human factor" or "pilot error" doesn't necessarily mean it was the pilot's fault.

Incorrect charts, systems, unfamiliarity, inappropriate usage, etc... can often be a major, major issue ... including improperly using the automated system, failing to calibrate it, etc... If there is one consistency to automation, it is this ...

They won't tell you when you're using them wrong ... and will gleefully not stop you from killing yourself, and others with you.

The Tesla autopilot is a perfect example. It is quite incapable of autonomous driving. Anyone who says otherwise ... including Tesla's own marketing ... is guilty of that. I have this conversation constantly with non-engineers who claim to be 'tech savvy.'

1967 just called. Stanley Kubrick thanks you for the wonderful idea for a screenplay about a frightening future full of automation.

 

[OmniKnight]

Is this true? I didn't eat on the two transcontinental flight I've had, but I still got jet lag on the flight from SF.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ver-eat-food-on-planes-and-other-jet-set-tips


The cabin crew’s secret to avoiding jet lag.

I eat nothing on flights. I’ve talked to a lot of stewardesses about it, and it’s a stewardess secret. Ten years ago, it was [a cabin crew member] on Singapore Airlines on what was, at the time, the longest flight in the world (17 hours from Singapore to New York). She told me that her tried-and-true trick was not eating in-flight. Basically, at superhigh altitude, your digestive system shuts down completely. Someone said to me it’s like being under anesthesia. So when you get off the plane, everything restarts and [your digestive system] has so much more work to do and so it makes you more tired.

I actually believe the digestive system thing. I've observed that I almost always have GI issues when flying, especially on longer hauls. The trick for me is to drink a bunch of bourbon on the flight, get hammered and hungry, and then crush some good food upon landing.

 

[UCFKnight85]

I fly long haul a lot. There's no issue with eating so long as it's a healthy option. On a flight your blood circulates slower due to atmosphere and position of sitting so your digestion is all screwed up. Avoiding high fat foods helps.

My best tip- buy compression socks. When you sit for hours your blood pools at your ankles and feet which can cause swelling, and has actually led to strokes for people getting off planes. I wear thee on all long flights and they make a big difference.

 

[fabknight]

I'm a horrible sleeper, jet lagged or not.

I have noticed I fart a lot at higher altitudes.

 

[Great2BAKnight2]

Huh?

There is a combination of many factors, including improper procedures that are very much automated. Just because it's marked "human factor" or "pilot error" doesn't necessarily mean it was the pilot's fault.

Incorrect charts, systems, unfamiliarity, inappropriate usage, etc... can often be a major, major issue ... including improperly using the automated system, failing to calibrate it, etc... If there is one consistency to automation, it is this ...

They won't tell you when you're using them wrong ... and will gleefully not stop you from killing yourself, and others with you.

The Tesla autopilot is a perfect example. It is quite incapable of autonomous driving. Anyone who says otherwise ... including Tesla's own marketing ... is guilty of that. I have this conversation constantly with non-engineers who claim to be 'tech savvy.'

The raw data has 60% of all fatal accidents are deemed to be Pilot Error. I'm not educated on the subject to argue whether they shouldn't be classified that way.

 

[UCFBS]

The raw data has 60% of all fatal accidents are deemed to be Pilot Error. I'm not educated on the subject to argue whether they shouldn't be classified that way.

But that was my point. Information and automation is often flawed and improperly used. This has been very much the case throughout the history of the FAA.

That's why the FAA has considered changing the phrase. The man can do nothing wrong and the incorrect information or inappropriate automation can kill. It remains only because of inertia and legacy.

Your post with it's assumptions here is a perfect example why. Heck, Arnold is in a new movie based on one where the ATC did nothing wrong, and the pilots did nothing wrong.

The FAA constantly has to change advisement based how automation works. Because procedures don't often cover or account for conflicting information or incomplete automation.

Heck, the common assumption by people that computers are accurate and flawless is a completely wrong assumption. They are even implemented, purposely, to not even be precise in many cases, for performance.

 

[UCFBS]

There's no secret other than sleep in the new timezone.

 

[UCF11and1]

The raw data has 60% of all fatal accidents are deemed to be Pilot Error. I'm not educated on the subject to argue whether they shouldn't be classified that way.

I heard 99% of fatal accidents are due to gravity

 

[Great2BAKnight2]

I heard 99% of fatal accidents are due to gravity

What's the other 1%? Inertia?

 

[CommuterBob]

What's the other 1%? Inertia?

Fire.

 

[UCF11and1]

What's the other 1%? Inertia?

1% for the planes shot down by missiles (Russia), flown into buildings, or fire

 

[UCFBS]

Just gonna leave this here ...

Causes of Fatal Accidents by Decade
- http://www.planecrashinfo.com/cause.htm

 

[UCFBS]

From (an oldie but goodie): http://www.denverpost.com/2010/02/13/human-error-is-biggest-obstacle-to-100-percent-flight-safety/

Cliffs ...

• Not recognizing automation failure or anomalies -- e.g.,
  • altimeter failed ... prompting the autopilot to prematurely power down the engines (Turkish Air)
  • plane’s air-speed indicators were giving faulty readings (Air France)

• "Loss of control” accidents accounted for 42 percent of commercial aviation fatalities worldwide
  • This is where the pilot(s) cannot recover, and it's an extreme case if they ever do
  • E.g., Sully's feat in 2009 is a perfect example of an extremely experienced pilot -- with more FAA/NTSB crash investigation experience than his own panel investigating him! -- being able to 'wit/gut-calc' his options, and keeping them open, while he was being told to do anything but that (even his own training not to ditch)
    • AirBus still tried to use the US NTSB/FAA to f' him over too, just to prove their plane could 'glide home in time'

Automation is causing fewer fatalities per mile/km traveled, but automation can still kill, and the rate is rising -- almost ironically as automation saves. I.e., less chance for human error, but more chance for automation error ... many unrecoverable manually, or only recoverable by the most inner knowledge, and extensive training, of pilots.

Planes are becoming safer and safer, and it's all these things that really aren't so much 'individual pilot(s) related' that are being marked 'human error.' Especially since AirBus, or Boeing for that matter, never wants to see their aircraft marked as the problem.

A much earlier one than Sully, that ruined the career of its pilot, Michel Asseline, was Air France 296. AirBus f'd him over, and there was a huge cover-up by some in the French NTSB, among others.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_296

In the case of the first article's Air France crash in the Atlatic, what came out later (after this 2010 article ) was:

A) Lack of training to identify the automation had failed, and ...
B) Lack of training to know what to do, manually in the case the automation had failed

And especially ...

C) Lack of training even being offered by and due to AirBus marketing and insistence than the system is infallible

It all went wrong, just like fly-by-wire systems do, when they don't account for various situations. That happened to Asseline in the first A320 FBW.

And a few pilots of the F-16 early on too, including the USAF and General Dynamics throwing the pilots under-the-bus. One widow won her lawsuit, cleared her husband's name, but never saw a dime (contractors have immunity -- but she cleared her husband's name, her goal).

In the Air France over Atlantic case, the training was supposed to be manual override, then X power at Y angle of attack, which optimizes the airframe and allows it to maintain attitude and altitude in almost any 'blind' situation. No one was trained on that. No one was told it either. It was hidden in some back page of the flight manual on the AirBus.

Full section from the aforementioned article ...

Spoiler

"Automation pros, cons

Bill Voss, president of the Alexandria, Va.-based international nonprofit Flight Safety Foundation, said that worldwide, more accidents reflect the troubling trend of pilots responding inappropriately to or not recognizing automation failure or anomalies during flight.

Two recent deadly examples were a Turkish Airlines jet that hit ground before the runway in Amsterdam in February 2009 and the Air France plane that crashed into the Atlantic Ocean amid severe thunderstorms in June.

An altimeter failed on the Turkish Air flight, prompting the autopilot to prematurely power down the engines. By the time the pilots realized what had happened, it was too late to avoid a crash.

It’s less clear what happened on the Air France flight, but investigators said the plane’s air-speed indicators were giving faulty readings before it went down. That’s a dangerous situation but is not by itself unrecoverable by an alert crew that is trained for it, Voss said.

“I can’t imagine how many people have been saved by automation, but what we haven’t done a good job of is evolving our training with the changes,” he said. “Any technology comes with new modes of failure, and we’ve never assessed and trained for these new modes of failure.”

“Loss of control” accidents — in which the crew was unable to recover from an unexpected event such as engine failure or a stall — accounted for 42 percent of commercial aviation fatalities worldwide from 1999 through 2008, more than any other cause, according to the Boeing Co. and the Commercial Aviation Safety Team, a joint effort between the FAA and the aviation industry.

In the U.S., loss-of-control accidents declined during the past decade, accounting for 29 percent of all fatal commercial airline crashes from 2000 to 2009, down from 34 percent in the previous decade, according to FAA statistics."​