I've read articles and seen documentaries on the number of safety mechanisms that were rejected. Almost all of the rejections happened around a board room where the Actuarial analysts were called in to weigh Cost of implementation vs Risk to the airline.
Not reliability, will it work, how many lives would it save in an average crash etc. etc. Cost of Implementation/continued research VS Risk To The Airline. That's the world. 2009/6/1 Cameron Childress <[email protected]>: > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Vivec <[email protected]> wrote: >> Not to mention if you had the knowledge that devices to save your life >> were never implemented because they cost too much, >> and the chance of something just like this happening was determined to >> be too small for that money/research to be spent. > > That's a pretty gloomy assumption to be making this early. It's a > giant heavy metal machine flying through the air over the ocean. > There's never going to be zero failure rate for something like that. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:297803 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
