As soon as one train brakes, the train behind should automatically brake. The separation distance can be maintained. The problem is if the first train hits an object or derails, this might cause it to slow down faster than the brakes would have done, and the following train may not have time to stop.
What happens if the train in front is a passenger train (a passenger pulled the alarm handle) and the train behind is 30 cars loaded with coal, steel beams or diesel fuel?
You can still brake - you just need (automatic) agreement of all trains behind you to do so.
You aren't allowed to brake 'as much as possible' anymore - instead the best you can achieve is 'the best the worst of the trains behind me can achieve'.
Thats already the case for carriages within a train.... And people are fine with it.
We're also fine with the risk of a derailment onto a neighbouring track with traffic going the opposite direction. We could have tech which detects that, but we do not.
The thing you are missing is compartmentalization. A modern high-speed train can hold around 1,000 people. This is the maximum number of people that could die in an accident (ignoring trains on other tracks or people next to the tracks). What you are proposing is essentially a train of infinite length, with virtual (software) coupling between groups of carriages. But then there is no limit to the maximum number of deaths in an accident. If you have 50 high-speed trains all traveling in this virtually coupled manner, a single accident may cause 50,000 casualties. People would not accept this, and no sane policy maker would allow it.
Note that if you consider derailments into neighboring tracks, you still have an upper limit of 2 times maximum train capacity, in our example 2,000.
You could also characterize the maximum braking ability of the train in front of you and the minimum braking ability of your own train and determine the needed distance for any given speed based on that. This would of course be more complicated and probably be solved by only including broad categories of trains (i.e. only two sets of values for either passenger trains or freight trains).
Only in the plural form though, right? I'm in the UK, where the usage you describe is common too, but reading "this guy" like in the comment above, I would assume they're talking about a man.
Even then it's highly context-dependent. Ask any heterosexual man "how many guys have you kissed in your life?" and not a single one of them is going to consider this instance of "guys" as encompassing women.
Your understanding is common in the US as well. Singular “guy” would read as “man” or “boy” while the plural “you guys” can read as gender neutral (though some argue that “you guys” should be avoided in mixed gender groups for being inadequately inclusive). I would expect there are some regional US differences in usage and reactions.
I think they're maybe alluding the fact that if you have a backup system which fails when you need to use it (e.g. your Time Machine backup turns out to be corrupted, which quite a few people in the comments seem to have experienced), you'd wish that you'd paid money to have a backup system which worked instead.
You wouldn’t usually just have a single backup system, If the disk image that time machine is stored on head issues that would usually be picked up at the time. It was being mounted and either repaired or you’d get less that the discount is corrupt. it’s never going to be as good as something like Borg where you’re doing regular data consistency checks but you can still check the fast system of the DMG as frequently as you wish.
It looks great but I suppose the downside, like a lot of nice native Mac apps, is that it seems to be Mac-only. So if you also want to back up non-Mac systems (e.g. to make off-site backups of NAS or server data), you'll need to set up, maybe pay for, and grok 2+ backup systems.
Would you be able to share those scripts? Or if not, an obfuscated/abstracted version of them?
I use brew but even with brew and brew cask, I find there's plenty of GUI apps that require manual installation, which will also have their own config spread out in various places, plus whatever CLI or background stuff I've installed myself (mostly hidden files/directories in my home folder so probably easier), system settings, etc. I don't know how I'd reasonably automate a restore of all of that stuff without having a Time Machine-style backup (essentially a disk image).
Unfortunatly, they contain too much sensitive information to provide them online and I don't have the time to make them nice and clean (it all started with a 50 lines bash script). But there are plenty of users providing macOS RICE / dotfiles...
Ultimately they're making planes for the airlines to buy though. If the airlines say they'd rather fit in 300 people by making most of the rows cramped together than 250 people with more legroom, the aircraft manufacturers will make sure they account for that in their design.
I don't think that's true. Pretty sure the 707 and 727 were launched and in service before the 747 even started development. The 737 was certainly in development as well, and was in service before the 74.
So by the time the 747 was flying with airlines, they already had the 707, 727 and 737 flying.
Indeed. I find it fascinating that the widespread modern generations of the 737 still have largely (or maybe entirely?) the same fuselage design as the now-ancient 707.
Going to museums like that is honestly one of the main reasons I'd like to visit the US. Unfortunately though, even just the biggest ones seem to be way too spread out to attempt in one trip, coming from Europe.
Fly into New York City. Visit museums there for several days. See a Broadway show. See the Intrepid.
Take the train down to Washington DC. Several days at the Smithsonian there, including a trip out to the Udvar-Hazy Center. Take a day trip by train to Baltimore to see the National Aquarium and the Maryland Science Center.
Rent a car, drive to a beach town in Virginia for a weekend; drive back and take the train back to NYC. Or, drive up to a Delaware beach instead and return the car in NYC.
See the other museums in NYC that you missed the first time. Fly home.
