I suspect that you're right in your sceptical attitude, Winsor. But
I understand that the floor of the cabin and the roof of the hold are
a bulkhead which is a major part of the structure. You might be able
to sustain a small explosion in the hold which would do no worse than
blow a hole in the bottom of the fuselage (as well as frightening the
sh*t out of the pax and losing your camera equipment). Such an
explosion might be unsustainable in the cabin.
I'm only guessing though. But for this family, our Summer holiday
will be a drive through the Brittany countryside to a little cottage
near Quimper. Because I'm not flying I shall be able to take my OM
(s), E-1 and 2 zooms and Bronica RF645. The coastal scenery should
be just right for me.
Let's just hope that the Channel ferries don't suffer similar
security scares ...
Chris
~~ >-)-
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
+44 (0)7092 251126
www.threeshoes.co.uk
homepage.mac.com/zuiko
On 12 Aug 2006, at 17:08, Winsor Crosby wrote:
> I think you are probably over gloomy about the situation, Garth. No
> government is going to put its airlines out of business. The tail
> doesn't wag the corporate dog.
>
> The current mess at the airport seems more for political consumption
> than anything else, especially when you consider that freight carried
> in the hold of the airplane is still unchecked, at least here in the
> US, and no real discussion of that. What is the difference if
> something goes off in the passenger compartment or in the hold of the
> plane? If airlines and shippers are being saved the cost of shipped
> cargo inspection because it is considered an unnecessary business
> expense, besides making people wonder whether there is any danger at
> all, it underscores the fact that they are not going inconvenience
> the airline business model for long.
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|