They did something similar in the 1950's - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea-Spray
US government conducted airflow tests on NYC subway to understand bioterror risk
31–40 of 53 posts
Re: US government conducted airflow tests on NYC subway to understand bioterror risk
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
A very fair point, but in this case installing filters or a reasonable hope for decontamination isn't really an option; the only thing we can do is prevent, detect, and evacuate.
Which makes faster detection a huge deal - I'd imagine one of the conclusions drawn from the results will be how best to detect ASAP without putting sensors literally everywhere.
I'm not sure that's feasible. It sounds like releasing an agent anywhere in the system is going to lead to it being pistoned through the entire system. You don't even need to do it at a stop. You'd need sensors at stops though, and presumably in the tunnels all along the way to sense a release. Nothing else would give more than a second or two of warning, that would initiate a lethal panic.
Re: US government conducted airflow tests on NYC subway to understand bioterror risk
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you point to a word, or collection of words in the title that you think suggests malice? Or, is it the whole title that makes the suggestion? As I am reading the title, no malice is suggested. It seems to just be a plain statement of fact.
They conducted airflow tests in order to understand and model how airborne material would spread. They didn't conduct bioterror research.
Well, they conducted airflow tests related to bioterror threats which is most of what makes the story newsworthy. But that's getting a bit long for a headline.
Re: US government conducted airflow tests on NYC subway to understand bioterror risk
#34For something that involves the US gov, anthrax, and a crowded public place, that was remarkably ethical. Clickbaity title IMO, but I'm not sure what to suggest. I think the current title suggests malice on the part of the US gov, but they were actually just doing some interesting research.
Can you point to a word, or collection of words in the title that you think suggests malice? Or, is it the whole title that makes the suggestion? As I am reading the title, no malice is suggested. It seems to just be a plain statement of fact.
"Bioterror research in the subway" brings to mind live virus or bacterial tests with "harmless" microbes like the tests over San Franciscon in the 1950's that may or may not have sickened (or possibly killed) residents sickened by the bacteria.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea-Spray
Though I wonder what testing was done to prove that the aerosol (made from wheat and corn starch, tagged with DNA) they they are spraying this time is harmless?
Re: US government conducted airflow tests on NYC subway to understand bioterror risk
#35I am curious to find out how many reports they got from riders who saw the researchers. I know that if I saw someone releasing gas like in the picture in the article, I'd quickly find someone to talk to about it. That said, hopefully they can validate models which will provide optimum locations for detectors, as well as action plans once a detection occurs, such as kill all cars near the detection and change venting…
Nothing to worry about, they're wearing orange vests and carrying clipboards.
Re: US government conducted airflow tests on NYC subway to understand bioterror risk
#36I am more interested in which station that is in those pictures that is so damn clean.
Re: US government conducted airflow tests on NYC subway to understand bioterror risk
#37So we allowed people to go on trains in large number without lengthy security checks but not for airline travelers? What's the difference?
It's hard to fly a train into a building. (That doesn't excuse the TSA's security theater, obviously.)
TSA isn't really for hijack protection, that was solved quite quickly after 9/11 with effectively impenetrable cockpits.
It's really for preventing destruction of the plane itself. A large bomb on a train underground could cause way casualties, which is why the strictness of the TSA is puzzling.
Re: US government conducted airflow tests on NYC subway to understand bioterror risk
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hard to fly a train into a building. (That doesn't excuse the TSA's security theater, obviously.)
It's also easier to stop a train, get off a train, or prevent collateral damage in case of malice/accident. Survivors are also a lot more likely if there is an accident, mostly because of gravity.
Very true. Even in the worst train derailments you never hear that there were no survivors.
Re: US government conducted airflow tests on NYC subway to understand bioterror risk
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you point to a word, or collection of words in the title that you think suggests malice? Or, is it the whole title that makes the suggestion? As I am reading the title, no malice is suggested. It seems to just be a plain statement of fact.
They conducted airflow tests in order to understand and model how airborne material would spread. They didn't conduct bioterror research.
Ok, we'll use that phrase in the title above.
Re: US government conducted airflow tests on NYC subway to understand bioterror risk
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hard to fly a train into a building. (That doesn't excuse the TSA's security theater, obviously.)
TSA isn't really for hijack protection, that was solved quite quickly after 9/11 with effectively impenetrable cockpits. It's really for preventing destruction of the plane itself. A large bomb on a train underground could cause way casualties, which is why the strictness of the TSA is puzzling.
If it really puzzles you then read a little bit on Michael Chertoff and immediately all pieces of the puzzle will click.
Hint: its all about money.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Chertoff
Google is your friend but this is good piece:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12...