europa-list
[Top] [All Lists]

Fw:: Re: Fuel tank grounding

Subject: Fw:: Re: Fuel tank grounding
From: ivor.phillips <ivor.phillips@ntlworld.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 15:49:28

----- 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>