141–150 of 223 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’d love Canada and the US. Nothing but slow travel on trains.
No one takes the train in the US because they don't go anywhere you need to go and aren't nice to be on.
Why spend $2,500-$5,000 and your trip takes ~30+ hours when you can spend $650 and get there in a few hours via flying
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The ashtrays are there, even today, because it is suspected that this flight [0] went down when someone disposed a cigarette butt in the lavatory trash, causing a fire. A reminder that aviation regulations are written in blood. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varig_Flight_820
> A reminder that aviation regulations are written in blood. It's enormously expensive for an airframe manufacturer to deal with the fallout of a crash. There aren't any engineers in an airframe manufacturer willing to sign off on a faulty design. Some good engineers are so worried about that they get shifted to working on conceptual projects. I took a loooong time for Boeing to convince the FAA that a twin engine je…
I don't believe they convinced the FAA twin is safer, just that it meets the necessary safety margins. Airlines want them to meet that regulation for fuel efficiency, but I'd want a source that they're actually safe-er, instead of simply safe enough
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might enjoy Hardspace: Shipbreaker. I assure you pressure differentials will be life or death!
Fyi, you appear to be shadowbanned and it's not clear why. You might consider sending an email to admin to work that out?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The ashtrays are there, even today, because it is suspected that this flight [0] went down when someone disposed a cigarette butt in the lavatory trash, causing a fire. A reminder that aviation regulations are written in blood. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varig_Flight_820
> A reminder that aviation regulations are written in blood. It's enormously expensive for an airframe manufacturer to deal with the fallout of a crash. There aren't any engineers in an airframe manufacturer willing to sign off on a faulty design. Some good engineers are so worried about that they get shifted to working on conceptual projects. I took a loooong time for Boeing to convince the FAA that a twin engine je…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What adverse health implications from vaping are there?
Still being studied, but the idea that it’s safe seems to be a very odd default. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/e-cigarettes/health-effects.html Why would your default assumption be that putting foreign (and poorly regulated) substances into your lungs is more likely than not safe? This is especially true since it’s a drug that doesn’t even have much claim to fame for positive recreational or medicinal benefits.
I'm not claiming that vaping is safe in some absolute sense, it wouldn't be surprising if there are some meaningful health risks. I personally do not vape myself because the times I've tried it, I've found getting the vapor into my lungs to be very uncomfortable. But it does seem like it's a strict health improvement over tobacco smoke, given that the CDC can't articulate a specific harm to the lungs caused by vaping.
Back in the 50's tonsillectomies were a regular rite of passage for kids, especially in colder places where kids spent more time indoors exposed to smoke. A couple years after moving from Maiibu to Toronto, I had the surgery.
https://www.uclahealth.org/news/article/tonsillectomies-stil...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A reminder that aviation regulations are written in blood. It's enormously expensive for an airframe manufacturer to deal with the fallout of a crash. There aren't any engineers in an airframe manufacturer willing to sign off on a faulty design. Some good engineers are so worried about that they get shifted to working on conceptual projects. I took a loooong time for Boeing to convince the FAA that a twin engine je…
> took a loooong time for Boeing to convince the FAA that a twin engine jet was safer than a 4 engine for ocean crossings I don't believe they convinced the FAA twin is safer , just that it meets the necessary safety margins . Airlines want them to meet that regulation for fuel efficiency, but I'd want a source that they're actually safe-er , instead of simply safe enough
My source is I was told this by the engineers who where involved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one takes the train in the US because they don't go anywhere you need to go and aren't nice to be on.
[flagged]
But if you wanted to travel LA-NY by train that's 67-82hrs with a transfer in Chicago. Compared to 5.5hrs by plane (+ time getting to/from airport and boarding).
Truly a better time - today we worry about using Rust 'unsafe' too often. They had a smoking room on a hydrogen airship! /j