Read the forum code of contact
By: 7th April 2011 at 11:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-It will be Risk/Probabiliy Vs Cost Imo
By: 7th April 2011 at 12:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Think Nashio hit the nail there...cost!:D
By: 7th April 2011 at 12:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Its the same with everything :)
The risk and probability of smoke in the cockpit happening / possible cost of a crash will be less (in terms of monetary reimbursement) Than the cost of refitting all aircraft with the system :)
I know its an unrelated topic, my grandfather runs the lloyds of london syndicate that insures nuclear power stations, including the japanese ones.
All of these powerstations could be built with every concieveable redundancy in place, prepared for every single type of completely unlikely situation.
The cost of adding these parts is weighed up against the probability/risk of it happening
Where do you draw the line :)
Posts: 2,810
By: scotavia - 7th April 2011 at 11:10
Another emergency landing,
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1879-full.html#204454
Ok the airline cockpit crew have an air supply , why have small auxilary battery powered extractor fans not been fitted to airline cockpits? Quick removal of smoke for say 30 minutes could make the emergency handling easier.