europa-list
[Top] [All Lists]

Fw: Fw:: Re: Fuel tank grounding

Subject: Fw: Fw:: Re: Fuel tank grounding
From: ivorphillips <ivor@ivorphillips.flyer.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 16:32:58
----- 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-  |
> >       |-------------------------------------------------------|
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>