61–70 of 78 posts
>five in-flight fires involving power banks on Australian or Australian-registered aircraft since 2016. So about one every two years. Better ban everything with a battery before this gets out of control.../s
And I'm glad you don't work in risk management.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aviation rules are written in blood. Everything you snidely dismiss actually happened and people died/came close to dying, so the rule was added.
What about all other means of transportation? Is the blood shed by aviation more red or more special then? It's not, it's the fact that the whole concept of flight goes against human intuition so it will always feel fishy and unsafe , even though the physics is much sounder and I'd say even safer than all other forms of transportation
In fact, new safety regs are often suggested by rail companies, who observe previously-unexpected situations IRL (despite the best attempts to nail these down in advance).
You're enjoying tossing around a lot of "What if"s, out of ignorance, but modern transit safety is not based on some dude sitting around and thinking up rules for funsies. It's a highly intensive engineering process, with multiple layers of cross-checking.
And then millions of us get behind the wheel, and there's nothing anyone can do about decisions made by each of them. Car safety is based on the hope people fear getting tickets, and some soft design aids.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are reasons more than a million people die on the roads every year, but that number only cracks a thousand for commercial aviation in particularly bad years. Most of those reasons are that all aviation incidents and accidents are analyzed to inform how the industry operates, but for road accidents we just shrug and say, "people die in accidents, whatever can we do?"
Exaclty. And this is fucking wrong and insane because the goal of a human should be not to die, not to avoid a particular type of death (eg. aviation death) . It's not like if you die on the car drive to the airport or because you are stabbed in the subway it's okay because you respawn This is the same cognitive failure that happens with Sharks v. Mosquitos and Nuclear v. Fossil fuels It seems to me you are defending…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about all other means of transportation? Is the blood shed by aviation more red or more special then? It's not, it's the fact that the whole concept of flight goes against human intuition so it will always feel fishy and unsafe , even though the physics is much sounder and I'd say even safer than all other forms of transportation
Speaking for rail safety alone: rules are written in hypothetical blood. The FRA and similar bodies in CAN and EU are VERY proactive about safety, as are the light rail train companies themselves. In fact, new safety regs are often suggested by rail companies, who observe previously-unexpected situations IRL (despite the best attempts to nail these down in advance). You're enjoying tossing around a lot of "What if"s,…
Trains make thousands of victims each year, I think worldwide the number borders the 10,000 from all causes and nobody gets on their case like planes which in a good year make 0 victims per year worldwide
So you have it the other way around, the hypotetical blood is the aviation one and the real blood is the one shed by trains and yet the scare factor is all on planes
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would argue at the performance of aviation safety, and the constant focus on how bad it could be, is exactly why aviation is safe. The day that we decide to stop focussing on what could go wrong, is the day that aviation stops being safe. For example, if aircraft come within five nautical miles or I think it’s 1000 vertical feet, it’s considered a very serious incident. Not because anyone is in danger at five nauti…
Naturally it's why it's so much safer, but the options for air travel safety most certainly aren't uniquely only between "as safe as possible" or "not safe at all". It should be no different than how we weigh safety regulation for any other mode of travel, and this kind of "either we do everything possible or we won't have safety" instead of focusing purely on what the measured target should be and how we currently m…
If I want to fly somewhere I already know that once I land there I face a considerable risk when I get in the metropolis. Risk of illness, violence, assault etc. Some metropolis are worse and some are better but the risk is always there.
The plane is the least of my problems.
The monopoly of aircraft production and the fact that planes can be used everywhere in the world is forcing us to withstand the same level of risk tolerance as the U.S. , and not even avg U.S citizen....for obvious reasons due to what happened theatrically some 25 years ago the risk tolerance of aviation is forced to be the same as Billionaire's Row , Central Park West , NYC, NY and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington D.C.
On the other hand...trains get to do this and nobody cares because they are local not global:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsN5_NoffsY
The FAA and the FDA are enemies of progress
The issue is that these power banks are often cheapo corporate gifts or bought out of vending machines, catering to the cheapest possible price and not certified to anything. In this case they have crappy BMS that doesn’t have thermal sensors or even make sure the cells are balanced during charging, and no mechanical integrity so the cell can just get crushed and explode. The solution is to require all consumer elect…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A trick (on U.S. airlines) is to plug in an overseas adapter (British style plugs seem to work pretty well for this purpose), since those prongs see far less use and still grip well.
British plugs are just better anyway. The rectangular pins have far better contacts mechanically and electrically and they're arranged in a triangle so the plug can't wobble its way out. It's really a very good design.
https://store.storeimages.cdn-apple.com/1/as-images.apple.co...
https://store.storeimages.cdn-apple.com/1/as-images.apple.co...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or better yet, create a new set of replaceable battery standards with multiple chemistry options, and certify the batteries. Users should be able to choose LiFePo4/LTO/Sodium for peace of mind and reliability if they don't need normal lipo levels of capacity.
It’s not that simple… the voltages are all different, and each chemistry has different charge and discharge rates, so this just makes the end product insanely complicated and expensive.