4 ms·
We shouldn't aim for 0 crashes due to low fuel though. How many deaths does carrying around 3x fuel than what you reasonably need contribute to via extra pollut
by henryfjordan 1y ago
We shouldn't aim for 0 crashes due to low fuel though. How many deaths does carrying around 3x fuel than what you reasonably need contribute to via extra pollution?
We should aim for 1 every 10-100 years or something reasonable like that.
- appreciatorBus 1y agoWe should account for deaths from pollution, but if we are going to do that, we should be willing to do that for 99% of aviation fuel that has nothing to do with reserves & safety margins, in addition to fuel used to drive cars. Any regulation short of "carry infinite fuel" will be a trade-off, and entail some risk and anyone involved in setting these knows that. Zero may not be our actual target or even possible, but it is a useful aspiration to ensure that everyone is pulling in the right direction.
- hshdhdhehd 1y agoWe dont aim for 0. Zero means dont fly. one in every 100 years globally for all flights would be very safe.
- vdqtp3 1y agoOn the contrary - commercial aviation does aim for perfection.
- jacquesm 1y agoAt 3x the number of deaths would be 0 because there would be no more flights.