I love the irony of how you wrote this comment. You say bye bye engine, and then the very next action is to walk to lunch. No mention of what happened to the car, or whether the driver had to stay and deal with it. Nope, the most significant effect on you was that you had to continue on without the car in the picture. Hunger is the real plan continuation bias.

We all took off our shoes and socks and waded to dry land, then walked to lunch, arriving late and damp. A specialist recovery company moved the dead car to a repair yard and later the mechanics replaced the engine I think?

The bias isn't really about hunger, humans just tend to stick to an existing plan even once available evidence suggests that plan can't work, that's why those "Low bridge, divert" signs are less effective than you'd expect, why Olivia Rodrigo's "Fuck it, it's fine" is so recognisable for relationships, and why pilots end up scud running in a little plane after setting off in marginal visual conditions.

"Hunger is the real plan continuation bias."

Oh man, that brings a memory of a old roadtrip. We were guests at a house of a old british lady in a olive farm in southern france - and dinner was ready.

It was also unusual cold, so the fire in the chimney was burning very hot. And apparently it was not build for that, as the isolation and already some wood outside the chimney on the roof was suddenly starting to slowly glow and burn. In other words, the roof was literally starting to be on fire. But they were already sitting at the table and seriously wanted to eat first and care about the problem that the house was burning later. Well and so they did. So we put out the fire and ate later.