Reply to: Kapton

[Peoplesoft bloke]

It was about the Corvair... though the then current model of the Beetle shared the same interesting handling foible...

I've read the book.

Indeed - the Corvair was Chevy's attempt to create a US Beetle - it wasn't that bad a car but a lot of Septics are totally hopeless drivers.

[expat]

If memory is right, it didn't come out until the first trial, though there had been allegedly a lot of stonewalling around disclosure. I beleive the initial punitive damages were well in excess of $125 mln and Ralph Nader was plaintiff counsel. Prompted the book unsafe at any speed - but I could be talking complete ballcocks and that might have been the Corvair.

No. Not complete

Unsafe At Any Speed was much earlier, it was what made Nader's name, and it was about the VW Beetle.

The damages were $125m but the amount was reduced on appeal. However the new amounts ($4m + $3m punitive damages or something like that) were still enough to tip the balance in Ford's arithmetic, and the original award left them scared.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Yep, the Tories will reduce immigration drastically, where Labour have abjectly failed more by design than incompetence IMO.

So not shutting the borders then. At least you admit that was bollocks - progress of a sort. OK - a little quiz - who was it who abolished exit controls, thereby removing a valuable guide to who was still here?

[Cyberman]

As I said, you don't have any idea - the Tories are not promising the "shutting our borders" nor could they. As for lies spin and deceit - what a laugh.

Yep, the Tories will reduce immigration drastically, where Labour have abjectly failed more by design than incompetence IMO.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

The abolition of HIPS, shutting of our borders, and cutting out spin, lies and deceit will do me. Come on you Tories !!!

As I said, you don't have any idea - the Tories are not promising the "shutting our borders" nor could they. As for lies spin and deceit - what a laugh.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

If memory is right, it didn't come out until the first trial, though there had been allegedly a lot of stonewalling around disclosure. I beleive the initial punitive damages were well in excess of $125 mln and Ralph Nader was plaintiff counsel. Prompted the book unsafe at any speed - but I could be talking complete ballcocks and that might have been the Corvair.

http://www.pointoflaw.com/articles/T...Pinto_Case.pdf

[Cyberman]

Based on a total load of arse as usual. Your lack of knowledge of aviation is matched only by your lack of any knowledge of Tory party policy - of course you don't need to know about any Tory policies as you will vote Tory without any consideration of policy issues.

The abolition of HIPS, shutting of our borders, and cutting out spin, lies and deceit will do me. Come on you Tories !!!

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Just a reminder. Don't fly on an Airbus !!

Based on a total load of arse as usual. Your lack of knowledge of aviation is matched only by your lack of any knowledge of Tory party policy - of course you don't need to know about any Tory policies as you will vote Tory without any consideration of policy issues.

[ASB]

Cost-benefit analysis.

The wrong decision is fixable. Ford did the same with the Pinto US car: they realised that a poor design in the fuel tank would allow rear-end crashes to cause fatal fires. The design fault was easily fixable with an extra protective collar, but the recall would be expensive. Ford calculated that it would be cheaper just to pay out on the lawsuits from victims' families.

When this was revealed, people got so angry at Ford's callous disregard for life that juries started making huge awards (one was $125 million), so Ford's cost-benefit calculation shifted a bit.

If memory is right, it didn't come out until the first trial, though there had been allegedly a lot of stonewalling around disclosure. I beleive the initial punitive damages were well in excess of $125 mln and Ralph Nader was plaintiff counsel. Prompted the book unsafe at any speed - but I could be talking complete ballcocks and that might have been the Corvair.

[expat]

...
I think there's a term for that - they calculate how how it costs to fix it - and then how much it costs them in terms of compensation for crashes that might occur - and then decide based upon that.
...

Cost-benefit analysis.

The wrong decision is fixable. Ford did the same with the Pinto US car: they realised that a poor design in the fuel tank would allow rear-end crashes to cause fatal fires. The design fault was easily fixable with an extra protective collar, but the recall would be expensive. Ford calculated that it would be cheaper just to pay out on the lawsuits from victims' families.

When this was revealed, people got so angry at Ford's callous disregard for life that juries started making huge awards (one was $125 million), so Ford's cost-benefit calculation shifted a bit.

[Cyberman]

Just a reminder. Don't fly on an Airbus !!

[DiscoStu]

If you think twice, it'll take so long you'll miss the flight anyway

[OwlHoot]

.. I will think twice before flying on an Airbus from now on.....

If you think twice, it'll take so long you'll miss the flight anyway

[sasguru]

More ill-informed speculation and bollux from the Chief Cretin.
Oi, Cretin, there's a reason why you haven't been very succesful in life - its because you're thick.

Stick to stuff within your intellectual capacity.

Ta.

[centurian]

In January 2008 a study commissioned and published by the FAA concluded that Kapton "should not be used in airborne applications."

I bet if Beoing had been the one's still using it and Airbus had gotten rid of it - then the language of the report would be somewhat different.

However, it seems there is a genuine concern with it, so Airbus should stop using it - and have a programme to ensure that it is made in existing aircraft.