There is thread about this already - and a major focus of that thread since about May has been to debate how far politicians are to blame and how hard they may have tried to conceal that from the public. If the Engineering and the politics are all of a piece, then why not keep them together...
Looks like you want to start a thread that isn't really about Engineering Failures and Disasters. Political conspiracy theories (even those that are justified) are more at home in forum1088
At risk of being written off as haughty (you know what, after forty years of engineering, I've grown a thick skin so it doesn't really bother me), here's what's inane about the thread title:
It doesn't tell you anything useful (which is what "inane" means if you look it up). "Guidance for...
I'd never considered that before, but that's the second time this week it's come up. Report here on an accident where two powered-wheelchair occupants drowned when the boat they were passengers on capsized.
Good link from Mint there.
Practical advice: Don't be in to much of a rush to leave steps one and two of Mint's process behind - fancy solutions that address the wrong problem are a glittery and dangerous temptation.
Having said that, plan it so you've got time to go round the whole loop two...
The idea goes back at least as far as Tsiolkovsky in the 19th Century. I've never seen a satisfactory explanation of how the cable is supposed to be laid in the first place (there's a significant coriolis force to deal with).
That is sometimes true. It depends what happened to cause the change.
If something happens to reduce the coolant flow (doesn't matter whether the blades fell off the circ pump impeller, thousands of baby mussels grew in the coolant pipework or one of the lads throttled down on a flow valve to...
What sort of flight envelope are you designing to (especially in terms of Normal Acceleration limits)? What's the chances (my guess would be high) that this mounting arrangement has to cope with some degree of negative g?
Why do you need the arms to retract? Is it for compatibility with some sort of launch/retrieval system? Could you build the fold/unfold actuators into the ground system instead (so you don't need to fly their weight around)?
Or just cgi the fold/unfold in afterwards?
A
Depressing number of the contributory factors were things society still holds to be good - Cheaper, faster, prettier, less regulation, less interference from local authority inspectors .....
That's not actually right. Picture for a moment a stand-up paddleboarder.
If the centre of buoyancy is above the centre of gravity then the system will be stable - that much is true.
If the centre of buoyancy is lower than the centre of gravity then - as long as you can arrange matters so...
That's quite interesting. For comparison, the position in the UK is that a risk reduction measure should be enacted unless the cost of doing so is grossly disproportionate to the value of the reduction in risk. There isn't a set-in-stone definition for "grossly disproportionate" - our policy...
I agree with most of that (and observe that when fishing boats capsize taking the crew with them, I'm not used to seeing the same reckless rescue efforts). Just not sure "alarmism" is the word I'd have chosen.
I'm hoping they've now given up trying to "rescue" people from a wreck sitting under 50m of water. For a while, that really looked like it was setting up to kill a diver or two.
Volume Vs Energy: I assumed that change was made sensible by the switch from town gas (whose calorific value is process-dependant) to natural gas (whose calorific value is much less variable). Is that rubbish?
