4 ms·

Wouldn't it be cheaper to focus on emergency failsafe devices or similar safety solutions to those incorporated by modern aircraft? Examples include: -Self-ri

Wouldn't it be cheaper to focus on emergency failsafe devices or similar safety solutions to those incorporated by modern aircraft? Examples include: -Self-righting mechanisms -Self-sealing compartmental design -Re-floating devices -"Carefree" fly-by-wire preventing dangerous manoeuvering

gk1 15y ago
All of these already exist in some form: > Self-righting mechanisms Modern ships can easily transfer ballast fluids (typically sea water, but sometimes fuel or distilate water) to correct any listing. There are no methods of righting an overturned ship because that would require an astronomical amount of moment. > Self-sealing compartmental design Watertight doors can be controlled from multiple stations on the ship, such as the bridge or the engineering control room. > Re-floating devices If you mean safety devices: Ships carry liferafts that, in the event of sinking, automatically detach from the ship, float to the surface, and inflate. If you mean re-floating the entire ship: Not feasible to re-float something that weighs hundreds of thousands of tons just to save some scrap steel. > "Carefree" fly-by-wire preventing dangerous manoeuvering Ships have automatic navigation and piloting, though not in shallower waters such as in ports.
- Tzunamitom 15y ago
  I'm not reinventing the wheel here, or suggesting anything new - just that focusing on improving these would be a better investment of resources than creating an unsinkable ship. For example: * How good are the systems that realise that ships need righting and transfer the ballast automatically before it overturns? * Refloating may not be feasible once the ship is overturned, but by then it'll be too late. How about self-inflating bags that inflate as the ship starts to sink, buying valuable time for people to escape? * Automatic navigation is one thing, but how can we improve it? Does it identify foreign objects above/below the waterline? Does it have stabilisation assistance? Does it pump ballast around to ensure the best possible handling under any condition? Just because these things already exist doesn't mean they can't be improved. In some cases this could potentially be done relatively cheaply.
ars 15y ago
> "Carefree" fly-by-wire preventing dangerous manoeuvering Note that this caused the crash Air France Flight 447 because it trained the pilot to react incorrectly (too aggressively) in an emergency.
- Tzunamitom 15y ago
  Yes, it also almost caused a crash on the Eurofighter because the display pilot knew he could operate at a more aggressive envelope than the system would let him. I'd still wager it has saved more situations than it has caused, and even if it hasn't - surely that just means the software has to get better?

gk1 15y ago

All of these already exist in some form: > Self-righting mechanisms Modern ships can easily transfer ballast fluids (typically sea water, but sometimes fuel or distilate water) to correct any listing. There are no methods of righting an overturned ship because that would require an astronomical amount of moment. > Self-sealing compartmental design Watertight doors can be controlled from multiple stations on the ship, such as the bridge or the engineering control room. > Re-floating devices If you mean safety devices: Ships carry liferafts that, in the event of sinking, automatically detach from the ship, float to the surface, and inflate. If you mean re-floating the entire ship: Not feasible to re-float something that weighs hundreds of thousands of tons just to save some scrap steel. > "Carefree" fly-by-wire preventing dangerous manoeuvering Ships have automatic navigation and piloting, though not in shallower waters such as in ports.

Tzunamitom 15y ago
I'm not reinventing the wheel here, or suggesting anything new - just that focusing on improving these would be a better investment of resources than creating an unsinkable ship. For example: * How good are the systems that realise that ships need righting and transfer the ballast automatically before it overturns? * Refloating may not be feasible once the ship is overturned, but by then it'll be too late. How about self-inflating bags that inflate as the ship starts to sink, buying valuable time for people to escape? * Automatic navigation is one thing, but how can we improve it? Does it identify foreign objects above/below the waterline? Does it have stabilisation assistance? Does it pump ballast around to ensure the best possible handling under any condition? Just because these things already exist doesn't mean they can't be improved. In some cases this could potentially be done relatively cheaply.

ars 15y ago

> "Carefree" fly-by-wire preventing dangerous manoeuvering Note that this caused the crash Air France Flight 447 because it trained the pilot to react incorrectly (too aggressively) in an emergency.

Tzunamitom 15y ago
Yes, it also almost caused a crash on the Eurofighter because the display pilot knew he could operate at a more aggressive envelope than the system would let him. I'd still wager it has saved more situations than it has caused, and even if it hasn't - surely that just means the software has to get better?