|
|
| Re: LIRR's M-9 train appearance update (1440604) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: LIRR's M-9 train appearance update |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Sat Jun 24 16:03:50 2017, in response to Re: LIRR's M-9 train appearance update, posted by randyo on Sat Jun 24 15:30:06 2017. One of the things I preach against in my line of work is "optimizing for the crisis." As an example, an army tank is certainly a safer means of transportation if one should be involved in an accident; the odds of survival in a tank are much greater than if one is driving an ordinary car. Yet we don't drive tanks to work every day on the off chance that we might be involved in an accident despite the advantage given; most of us prefer a car that looks nicer, or one that has decent fuel efficiency, or one that can go faster on the highway and save us travel time. If one is involved in an automobile accident and even dies, bereaved relatives don't bemoan the fact that the deceased wasn't driving an army tank the way he should have been, and they don't immediately purchase army tanks for themselves so that such a fate won't befall them.If a major reason (or especially the only reason) for using single-leaf doors is to facilitate the ingress and egress of people in wheelchairs in the event of a door failure, that to me sounds like a case of optimizing for the crisis and enduring disadvantages on every single door open and close. In good design, one generally optimizes for the normal condition rather than the exception. One might provide for the exception, to be sure, but to optimize for it is usually silly. |
|
|
|