But with airline crashes most passengers also walk away. In fact, airliners are between on and two orders of magnitude less fatal (per time of flying) than general aviation.
There's an easy way out of such trap - you yourself would need to just stop flaunting your wealth (the alternative - being much more frugal with it - would also further increase financial safety / relative value)
Then there's also "gross national happiness"... (sort of used by one country quite high on the above list, but which many of us would consider to be impoverished)
Are you kidding? Two of the things you mention are the main reason why autoland systems came into existence in the first place and why they are routinelly used.
So how uncomfortable are you with the knowledge that most crashes are due to human error (and large of those - pilot error) / why apparently it doesn't stop you from flying?
One thing I would like to say though. I used to teach embedded programming, like the avionics and flight control systems. I had some great students, and some that made me fear for my life when I found out who they worked for. I want a human pilot on the controls, with a back up human on stand by.
Considering those students can be also behind fly-by-wire/etc. systems?
Autolandings of commercial aircraft are a routine, daily thing.
And if you think Buran & its atmospheric analogues (terminal approach is what matters here; outside of it, US Shuttle also does auto reentry except in one mission, IIRC; and even that one without an actual need to do it) have only one demonstration of autoland, then I have this bridge to sell...
And we have precedents of such consolidation happening for a long time, also in airline industry - where are flight mechanics on recent generations of large commercial aircraft? Navigators? Radio operators?
No, the two of them are there mostly to control actions of each other, to notice possible mistakes. At a certain point of technology advance, this level of verification might go the way of flight mechanics, navigators and radio operators (eliminating them was also a stupid idea, right?)
He's not really a "backup" for such fearmongering hypothetical situations, he's there as part of the process involving both pilots verifying their actions.
But at some point the idea won't be much of stretch - do you despair at loss of flight mechanics, navigators and radio operators?
Then look it up. In the context which you yourself used previously, the impact on individuals, even operating in "pure"/old terms, what you criticised is closest to communism ("From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"), not socialism ("To each according to his contribution") Macroeconomic realities are another thing...and close ties (even if somewhat informal ones) between state/population & few industries don't exactly appear to be on the way out.
Of course in Germany you have also mostly German drivers, with German training; cars need to pass very strict German maintenance standards and the Autobahns are built to very exact German specifications (also slope, etc.). When there is a speed limit (somewhat often, the Autobahns are constantly repaired / corrected), it is quite nicely followed. All of "mommy and daddy state" kind; you have to find something different to alleviate your fears.
And the key word being how Bahrain only appears safer; very close to US in traffic fatalities per capita actually, despite having very significantly lower number of cars per capita.
It's not about freedom when your recklessness is quite likely to kill others in the process of claiming your life; that's where freedom ends, remember?
Slashdot Mirror
But with airline crashes most passengers also walk away. In fact, airliners are between on and two orders of magnitude less fatal (per time of flying) than general aviation.
Engine != (though includes obviously) heat engine.
Think of it in the categories of simple, small, homebuilt aircraft (which it is)
Since it was presented at Le Bourget, it's a fair bet to say the electricity to recharge the batteries was provided by some nuclear powerplant.
Also, the electric version has four engines; making Cri-Cri the smallest 4-engined aircraft now, too.
You must choose to live in "rich neighborhoods" - which in itself includes flaunting with wealth / disregarding keeping mostly low profile.
Definitely.
A hint / what's the current exchange rate? ;)
People generally just don't monitor regularly the trash of their neighbours...
There's an easy way out of such trap - you yourself would need to just stop flaunting your wealth (the alternative - being much more frugal with it - would also further increase financial safety / relative value)
Sort of; it seems GDP per capita of 15k per year (which is quite high, on average) might be enough. Certainly some of the countires with high places on this list might be a surprise for large part of /. audience?
Then there's also "gross national happiness"... (sort of used by one country quite high on the above list, but which many of us would consider to be impoverished)
There, a reply, happy? (hey, whatever makes you hot; no diff. here / slightly bored today)
It makes it, with pretty high certainty, quite cheap to install / common in the future.
Are you kidding? Two of the things you mention are the main reason why autoland systems came into existence in the first place and why they are routinelly used.
So how uncomfortable are you with the knowledge that most crashes are due to human error (and large of those - pilot error) / why apparently it doesn't stop you from flying?
One thing I would like to say though. I used to teach embedded programming, like the avionics and flight control systems. I had some great students, and some that made me fear for my life when I found out who they worked for. I want a human pilot on the controls, with a back up human on stand by.
Considering those students can be also behind fly-by-wire/etc. systems?
Most airports had only grass surface not very long time ago, and just look where we're now.
In the process of CAT IIIc autoland, there might as well be zero touching of control inputs.
Autolandings of commercial aircraft are a routine, daily thing.
And if you think Buran & its atmospheric analogues (terminal approach is what matters here; outside of it, US Shuttle also does auto reentry except in one mission, IIRC; and even that one without an actual need to do it) have only one demonstration of autoland, then I have this bridge to sell...
And we have precedents of such consolidation happening for a long time, also in airline industry - where are flight mechanics on recent generations of large commercial aircraft? Navigators? Radio operators?
No, the two of them are there mostly to control actions of each other, to notice possible mistakes. At a certain point of technology advance, this level of verification might go the way of flight mechanics, navigators and radio operators (eliminating them was also a stupid idea, right?)
He's not really a "backup" for such fearmongering hypothetical situations, he's there as part of the process involving both pilots verifying their actions.
But at some point the idea won't be much of stretch - do you despair at loss of flight mechanics, navigators and radio operators?
...who in CAT IIIc doesn't need to touch direct control inputs.
(funny how you said "pilot" and not "pilots")
"Above average" in those questions was usually defined as "in the top 50% of drivers."
Then look it up. In the context which you yourself used previously, the impact on individuals, even operating in "pure"/old terms, what you criticised is closest to communism ("From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"), not socialism ("To each according to his contribution")
Macroeconomic realities are another thing...and close ties (even if somewhat informal ones) between state/population & few industries don't exactly appear to be on the way out.
Of course in Germany you have also mostly German drivers, with German training; cars need to pass very strict German maintenance standards and the Autobahns are built to very exact German specifications (also slope, etc.). When there is a speed limit (somewhat often, the Autobahns are constantly repaired / corrected), it is quite nicely followed.
All of "mommy and daddy state" kind; you have to find something different to alleviate your fears.
And the key word being how Bahrain only appears safer; very close to US in traffic fatalities per capita actually, despite having very significantly lower number of cars per capita.
It's not about freedom when your recklessness is quite likely to kill others in the process of claiming your life; that's where freedom ends, remember?
Most accidents involve some breaking; with its results (speed at the exact moment of impact) varying greatly depending on the initial kinetic energy.