Neil3030 wrote: » Fascinating guy. I saw a documentary a while ago on him. If I recall the story correctly, he owned a commercial airline and one of their 767 planes crashed into a jungle somewhere in South East Asia. The initial cause of the crash was attributed to pilot error, as the flight data showed the plane was intentionally put into a nose-dive. But Lauda refused to accept that his pilot had screwed up, flew out to the crash site, and funded both a search through the jungle for various parts of missing wreckage, and also various additional tests on flight simulators. Turns out, that 767s had a gizmo on the engine that reversed the thrust to slow it down on landings. The instruction to pilots, should this ever accidentally reverse mid-air, was exactly what the pilot had done - put it into a nose-dive to regather velocity. But Lauda's research showed that this instruction was only tested up to a certain altitude, and beyond this altitude, it would result in a crash. The planes were consequently redesigned. Probably would have taken another crash before Boeing had copped onto this, so a conservative estimate is that he saved hundreds of lives.
Deleted User wrote: » errlloyd wrote: » Is episode 3 grimmer than episode 1? Yes.
errlloyd wrote: » Is episode 3 grimmer than episode 1?
errlloyd wrote: » Well that's close to the grimmest thing I've ever seen.
Deleted User wrote: » errlloyd wrote: » Well that's close to the grimmest thing I've ever seen. Yeah. It's actually horrific. Nightmarish. The real life actualisation of maybe the worst possible way to die. Acute Radiation Syndrome really is the sum of all fears, literally being torn apart at a molecular level and spending your last days in total and utter agony and more or less immune to the benefits of pain medication.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Yeah. It's actually horrific. Nightmarish. The real life actualisation of maybe the worst possible way to die. Acute Radiation Syndrome really is the sum of all fears, literally being torn apart at a molecular level and spending your last days in total and utter agony and more or less immune to the benefits of pain medication.
troyzer wrote: » I'm heading to the world cup and one of the things I'm most looking forward to (if that's the right way of putting it) is the Hiroshima peace museum. There are meant to be really harrowing displays in there.
Stheno wrote: » It was like they were melting from the outside in
swiwi_ wrote: » The definition of reckless is climbing Mt Everest. I see 2 Irish victims in the last week.
errlloyd wrote: » I usually understand those who die on everest, or skydiving, or whatever. But I don't understand bring an everest tour guide when your a father to a four year old. The guy who died today died on his fourth ascent. He was a pro climber. Climbing was his sport and it killed him, to me that's par for the course. Not much sympathy but no judgement
swiwi_ wrote: » Yeah I suppose. It’s got a lot safer over time, but there still seems to be 10 or so deaths every year. The human body is not made for those altitudes, once you get to that death zone above a certain height you are literally dicing with death. If you’re single then yeah maybe but with young kids I think it’s just irresponsible.
Zzippy wrote: » A retired colleague of mine is just back from Everest. He didn't make a summit attempt in the end, wasn't feeling great and made the right choice to pull out. He did climb Manaslu last year (8,163m) at the age of 65! He met the guys who died at base camp. My impression from chatting to him is that it becomes an obsession, and some people just don't know how to recognise their limits.
errlloyd wrote: » Manaslu is a good bit more dangerous than Everest I think? Nice Hipster mountain right there.
Zzippy wrote: » errlloyd wrote: » Manaslu is a good bit more dangerous than Everest I think? Nice Hipster mountain right there. Ha, he's as far from a hipster as it's possible to get! But yeah, it's supposed to be a more technical ascent/descent I believe.
troyzer wrote: » On a clear day with support, most very fit people could get up and down Everest if sufficiently motivated. It's not a difficult mountain. There are lots of scary moments that take balls but very little that requires skill. There's an Australian paraplegic who summited last year. There was also some Japanese guy in his 80s.
Zzippy wrote: » troyzer wrote: » On a clear day with support, most very fit people could get up and down Everest if sufficiently motivated. It's not a difficult mountain. There are lots of scary moments that take balls but very little that requires skill. There's an Australian paraplegic who summited last year. There was also some Japanese guy in his 80s. Yes, it's not the technical climbing that many enjoy, it's just the extreme altitude that kills so many. I follow Joe Simpson on twitter (Touching the Void). Spent a day fishing with him once, fascinating guy. He is pretty scathing about how commercial Everesting has become.
Zzippy wrote: » Mental photo!https://twitter.com/nimsdai/status/1131931349030457345?s=19
stephen_n wrote: » https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/td-bailey-ran-10km-race-three-weeks-after-swing-fall-38146778.html If this doesn’t end up as a fraud conviction and with her resignation as a TD, I will lose all faith in this country.
[Deleted User] wrote: » I have seen a great many claims that at face value looked completely spurious only to scratch beneath the surface and come to the conclusion that there was negligence and the complaint was fair enough. Often times when it looks and smells like BS, that's exactly what it turns out to be - just not always. The optics of this look absolutely terrible and her political career is after taking a potentially fatal setback with the reporting. I've read nothing which suggests this is anything other than a completely frivolous claim but the one caveat I'd keep in mind is that optically frivolous claims sometimes have genuine merit.
Squidgy Black wrote: » I'm sure there probably was some form of injury caused, but the whole grounds of the claim are ludicrous. The suit isn't that the swing broke, or was faulty. It's because she fell backwards because she had items in both her hands and she alleges the hotel was negligent because the swing was "unsupervised" and there were no signs to instruct patrons how to use it safely. This is an adult in their 50s saying they need to be supervised and told how to use a swing.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6081e4655739e0887aaf16222f88b015.svg)
