An unknown person breaking the glass and potentially armed could be a threat.
That’s a valid statement.
It also demonstrates a wider problem: gun proliferation is so incredibly high that the default assumption is always going to be “that person might have a gun,” and this will always prompt a much lowered threshold to use one’s own gun in return.
Another way to look at it is: when was the last mid-air collision in the US, or even the world involving TCAS equipped airliners? The only one that comes to mind is the DHL-BAL mid air in 2002, which was a result of the one crew not following the TCAS instruction.
A significant part of the report focused on near collisions on runways.
TCAS doesn’t mitigate that, right?
If weight isn’t an issue, then it makes sense to use a system that only costs a fraction of a hydrogen-powered setup.
Trains don’t need to fly. Just pack them full of batteries or - arguably even better - just electrify the line wherever possible.
That’s just not an option for planes, so hydrogen remains a potentially viable approach.
Most people who insist that imperial is better still have absolutely no idea how many spoons there are to a cup, how many cups to a gallon, how many inches to a mile, how many square yards to an acre.
“Nuclear power - too cheap to meter!!”
I’m still waiting for that to happen.
and you’ll note the heat map correlates with wealth (and thus smartphone access).
It doesn’t, or else there would be a lot more sightings all over Europe, South Korea and Japan, Australia and New Zealand, Israel, Saudi Arabia and various emirates, and a good junk of China.
Also, smartphones didn’t exist for the first 101 years of the reporting time span.
So Elon is now going for the severed horse head under the bedsheets approach to persuade advertisers?
That’s a bold move.
Like 99 percent of companies who are suddenly doing something good and acting in the interest of the consumer.