----- Original Message -----
From: "ivor.phillips" <ivor.phillips@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Fw:: Re: Fuel tank grounding
>
> ----- Original Message
> : Re: Fuel tank grounding
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > Another length of copper wire joins the triangle to the airplane
> > >ground and thence to the engine ground. I'm hoping that this, combined
> with
> > >a damp rag and an inbread fear of thunderstorms, should keep me safe.
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------
> >
> > safe
> >
> > Etymology: Middle English sauf, from Old French, from
> > Latin salvus safe, healthy; akin to Latin solidus
> > solid, Greek holos whole, safe, Sanskrit sarva entire
> > Date: 14th century
> >
> > 1 : free from harm or risk
> > 2 : secure from threat of danger, harm, or loss
> > 3 : affording safety or security from danger, risk, or difficulty
> > ----------------------------------------------
> >
> > I've worked around too many lawyers . . . "safe" is
> > a word I'd like to erase from the lexicon of airplanespeak.
> > Airplanes are dangerous as hell . . .they have whirrly
> > things up front that will mince you in a heartbeat. A
> > few seconds of inattention to maintaining a comfortable
> > position INSIDE the envelope of predictable, useful
> > and comfortable operation and you, your machine and
> > anyone in close proximity may wish they'd never gotten
> > out of bed that day.
> >
> > One of the first things a lawyer wants to do is get
> > you to defend the safety of your product. I prefer
> > to put the examination on a different footing, "No sir,
> > in the hands of inattentive, unqualified or evil
> > persons, this gizmo can be the source of great harm.
> > I submit therefore that it is NOT safe."
> >
> > From that point on, if the conversation is to continue,
> > focus needs to shift to operators of the gizmo. I recall
> > a conversation I had with a lady standing in line with
> > me at a convenience store. There was a security guard
> > for some organization a few folks ahead of us in the
> > line. He had a heavy-duty hog-leg holstered on his
> > hip. She expressed discomfort about the weapon.
> >
> > This prompted some thoughts about conditions that
> > surround a potential hazard. For example, holstered
> > as it was, the gun represented no threat I could
> > perceive. If he had pulled the gun out to inspect
> > it, the threat level would elevate but if
> > it appeared that the action was by responsible
> > folks, there is still little cause for concern.
> > If the gun were out and the holder was yelling
> > at some perp, "Stop or I'll drop you!", the
> > threat level is obviously severe. It's the same
> > gun in all cases. Safe? Only in the context of
> > its surroundings.
> >
> > Taking the cap off a container of fuel is akin to
> > pulling a gun from its holster - the threat level
> > moves up a notch. Depending on handling technique
> > and equipment used during the transfer the threat
> > elevates IRRESPECTIVE of any notions we may harbor
> > about being "safe".
> >
> > We can victimize ourselves by using this word too
> > loosely. "Safe" can elicit a sense of
> > security that encourages inattentive or ill-
> > informed behavior from which the unhappy
> > statistics are counted. These machines we enjoy
> > so much are no different than automobiles, chain
> > saws or firearms . . . none are inherently
> > "secure from threat of danger, harm, or loss".
> > However, in the hands of informed, responsible
> > users they are tools of great utility and satisfaction.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> > |-------------------------------------------------------|
> > | There is a great difference between knowing and |
> > | understanding: you can know a lot about something and |
> > | not really understand it. -C.F. Kettering- |
> > |-------------------------------------------------------|
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|