• 1 Post
  • 67 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle


  • Nah, even the FAA recognized that this was an oversight; a situation that hadn’t been considered when writing the rule. They said as much in at least one response to a letter requesting clarification. This particular rule wasn’t written in blood. This one was written in “Whoops, I hadn’t considered that.”

    It gets better: The flight review requirements are satisfied by the pilot obtaining a new rating. If our pilot completes his ballooning check ride, it resets the clock on his biennial flight review requirement. He is not required to get a separate flight review covering operation of the 747. That’s a bigger oversight, IMO, but a prudent pilot is going to get a review for their “highest” rating, and not exploit this technicality.

    Correcting the original issue properly, any rated pilot should be considered a “student” when exercising any flight privileges in an aircraft for which they have never been rated. Every pilot is a “student” unless they have obtained every possible flight rating.


  • I recently learned something stupid about FAA licensing. Once you have a license higher than “student”, you have to have a biennial flight review in order to fly an aircraft. If you don’t have a current review, you cannot be the pilot in command of any aircraft.

    A student pilot does not need a current flight review, just an endorsement from their instructor, in order to fly solo.

    So, if you are a former 747 pilot with 10,000 hours in the cockpit, and you seek to add a glider or balloon rating, you are not allowed to solo these aircraft unless you have a current flight review. Since solo flight is a requirement before obtaining these ratings, you cannot get a rating in one of these aircraft without getting a flight review in an aircraft you are already rated for.

    A 14 or 16-year-old kid with a few weeks of training is allowed, but the air transport pilot is not.


  • Jury Nullification is when you, as a jurist, understand that your duties to the accused under the 6th Amendment is to judge their actions as a layperson. In doing so, your constitutionally-imposed duties supersede the authority of legislated law. You aren’t just “allowed” to find the accused innocent of violating a law you deem to be unjust; you are constitutionally obligated to exercise your best judgment and acquit under those circumstances.

    Your duty to judge the accused based solely on the law includes the constitution, and the constitution requires you to judge as a layperson, not an agent of the state. Where the state’s laws conflict with your own rationality, you are obligated to obey the constitution, not the state.

    During voir dire, you, a potential juror, will be asked something along the lines of “Do you have any beliefs that would prevent you from reaching a decision in accordance with the law?” When you consider your answer, remember that the constitution is law. I can’t speak for you, but I hold no such beliefs; I can decide purely on the basis of the law.










  • No, you’re not understanding me correctly. Mostly because I misspoke, so that’s on me, not you.

    The contact patches I was talking about are the corners of the rectangle. Everything between the wheels is the footprint.

    The area of the footprint basically determines the minimum MPG you can have. (The more complicated point is that it is related to all the vehicles you produce rather than a specific minimum, but that overcomplicates the issue. The point is that CAFE standards provide strong incentives for manufacturers to increase the “footprints” of their vehicles. The larger the footprint they can claim, the less MPG improvement they need to make. So, longer and wider wheelbases.




  • It is “necessary” for them to be that wide.

    CAFE standards are based on “footprint” which is basically the rectangle of the tire contact patches. If you’re a car manufacturer who can’t meet the NHTSA’s MPG requirements for the size of car you produce, you can increase the size of your cars, so they fit in a larger class that requires less of an MPG improvement.

    The most effective way to increase the footprint is to widen a narrow car, increasing its footprint toward square.


  • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todaytoComic Strips@lemmy.worldWide Cars
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Yeah, nobody wants wide cars. Manufacturers are making them wider to make it easier for them to meet NHTSA’s CAFE standards.

    The standards require year-on-year MPG improvements. The problem is that they require proportionally more improvement on the smallest, highest economy cars, and less improvement on the largest, lowest economy vehicles.

    The standards are based on the “footprint” of the vehicle: the rectangle between the contact patches of the tires. The larger the area of that footprint, the larger the vehicle, and the less MPG increase it needs to have.

    So, they are pushing the wheels toward the corners, and widening the wheelbase, approaching a square to maximize their footprints. They are making cars bigger and boxier so they don’t have to make them more efficient.

    Fuel economy of the cars on the road is actually falling, because manufacturers are effectively prohibited from continuing to make their smallest, most efficient vehicles. They are compelled to either discontinue those vehicles, or embiggen them to fall in a larger class.