boxey
Joined 12 years ago
Karma
-4
Submissions
5
Member since
Jan 5
Recent submissions
Comment · 12 years ago
Comment · 12 years ago
Wrong, current image sensors have around ~50% quantum efficiency nowadays. [1] That's 1 f-stop from the theoretical maximum, while they're pushing around 10 f-stops above the top-of-the-line mobile phone cam / security cam.
The pace of technology is still limited by physics - if they take out the 2kW monster flash then the lens size needs to be increased to a diameter of several meters, just to maintain the same performance at a distance of 1 meter (!).
Comment · 12 years ago
... with 2x Bowens DX1000 1kW flash lamps with dish reflectors to illuminate the bystanders at a distance of 1 meter.
That's ridiculous. Why is this even published?
Comment · 12 years ago
Wrong, commercial passenger planes going missing are much less expensive. Commercial plane disappearance is close to a 'black swan' event (1/10years) [1]. Tyler Durden this:
* search and rescue for this rare event: $50M/10year = $5M/year
* cost of tracking system: $20k/year amortized cost per system * 5k aircrafts = $100M/year
The airline industry as a whole has made a cumulative loss during its 100-year history. Airlines are already nationalized one way or another, like it or not. [2]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aerial_disappearances [2] http://www.johnkay.com/2005/09/27/airlines-and-the-canine-fe...
Comment · 12 years ago
Agreed. People forget that in addition to the nominal cost of a new tracking system ($120k PER PLANE in the article, not including control center cost), just the weight alone costs about $3k/year for each 1kg added to the plane. Add the yearly communication service, maintainance, depreciation costs to this, and we're soon gonna be paying $3k/plane ticket.
In contrast, since MH370, Inmarsat has changed the time period for handshakes with their terminals from one hour to 15 minutes. Cost: $0.
Year 2000 has passed, and we're all still waiting for our flying cars.