Jump to content

dmwalker

Members
  • Content Count

    996
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

153 Excellent

About dmwalker

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    CYYZ

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    Other
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. With the emphasis on "little".
  2. I see that the concern is that security is compromised when more people can enter the cockpit but they would enter only as the pilot is exiting and exit only as the pilot was re-entering, so that doesn't sound any less secure. In any case, it seems that security is more compromised when a flight attendant brings the pilots' meals into the cockpit. Why can't the secure cockpit area be extended to include a toilet? I realise it couldn't be retrofitted because of location of door 1R, but it could be done with new aircraft designs.
  3. The rule was to prevent a suicidal pilot being alone in the cockpit and locking everyone out. That isn't what happened in this case, is it? Are you implying that Air France routinely breaks this rule? That would presumably mean several , or even many, airlines also break this rule. That's a bit depressing to me as a potential passenger.
  4. Not only do the Scots not drop their "h"s, they even add extra "r"s.
  5. It probably doesn't apply in this case but what happened to the recommendation, arising from the Germanwings crash, that there always be two persons in the cockpit?
  6. It seemed to me that the descent was similar to that of EgyptAir Flight 990 in 1999. It also had a rapid descent then a recovery then a final, rapid descent. It was generally thought to have been a suicide although it wasn't reported as such.
  7. I remember, back in the 70s, walking out to a Japan Airlines flight in fairly heavy rain; each passenger was given a basic umbrella which was then handed back as we entered the aircraft. Montreal Mirabel Airport used mobile lounges to take passengers to outlying aircraft; the whole passenger compartment could be raised to allow direct boarding.
  8. So, where does Zefram Cochrane fit into all of this?
  9. Navigating through a dense forest is impressive but how about "snow or rain or heat or gloom of night"?
  10. Was it all one way, i.e. from the outer solar system to the inner?
  11. They used to enforce that back in the 70s and I don't know why they stopped. The only exception should be parents with babies and they are assigned to a special row with more legroom and a place to put a baby cot. I remember on Korean Airlines in those days, I couldn't take anything into the cabin, not even my movie camera.
  12. Don't forget "The Quatermass Experiment" (1953 BBC TV Series).
  13. I think that is a 1 acre lot. A 10 acre lot would be 660ft on a side. I could be wrong, though. There's always a first time.
  14. I'm not sure how they estimate 28,000 years of power since the half life of Carbon 14 is 5,730 years. Does it mean it still has enough power in, say, a 90% depleted state?
  15. Here is an excerpt from the comments section for that video: "Arkenlight patented the entire concept back when the physics was discovered. Nano-Diamond-Battery, Incorporated , aka NDB, Inc., has not produced a working model. They claim to have demonstrated two proof-of-concept devices at Livermore, but Livermore has not confirmed that that actually happened to my knowledge. NDB originally claimed that their batteries would be able to power everything from phones to planes to EVs and would last for tens of thousands of years. However, they have never released a datasheet proving these claims. Not only that, but they actually recanted their claims not long after they made headline news, stating that they'd been misquoted when they said their batteries would power cars. Arkenlight, when they were asked what they thought about NDB, said, very specifically, that there is no way NDB is getting the power output they claim and that, if NDB is telling the truth about their battery physics, they're in clear violation of patent law. Since then, NDB seems to have modified their design enough to satisfy international patent law, but regardless they have yet to provide any actual data backing up their claims. Not too long ago, they sent out an email informing people signed up for their newsletter (which includes me) that they had been granted 3 patents by the US government, but, again, they have not provided any data."
×
×
  • Create New...