Somehow I keep thinking we shouldn't build those buildings in the first
place. Although it is a magnificent look, the danger is built into it. They
are supposed to withstand earthquakes as well, but I don't feel comfortable
in them.
Frits W�thrich
>
> Chris Brogden wrote, regarding possible options for lifesaving procedures:
> > Seems to me that with all our current technology we should be able to
> > come up with some methods that may save lives in the future. How
> > about a helicopter carrying a long cable with a large cage attached to
> it?...
> > [A]n inflatable helium air bag.... [E]mergency parachutes....
>
> All good ideas, Chris. I remember something even more low-tech (read that
> "fool-proof and robust") that I did as sort of a game at a summer camp I
> went to as a child. We had a cable stretched taut from the roof of one of
> the buildings at the camp -- maybe the third floor? We then had a bracket
> that went over the cable, and we held onto both ends of the bracket as we
> slid down. I seem to remember that the Space Shuttle astronauts have some
> sort of escape device like this, to be used in case of a launchpad fire.
> Periodic testing of this escape device is apparently dangerous.
> I guess in
> the assessment of any device envisioned for escape from skyscrapers, one
> would have to weigh the benefits of quicker evacuation speed (vs. stairs)
> against the risk of a deadly fall from hundreds of feet above the ground.
> Perhaps some small part of the tens of billions that will be spent in the
> aftermath of this week's events might be earmarked for exactly
> this kind of
> engineering research. I hope there are lots of scientists and
> engineers at
> NIST, NASA, etc. who are thinking creatively about solutions of
> the kind you
> discuss.
>
> Bill Peifer
> Rochester, NY
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
