"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 6 May 2015 18:49:10 UTC+1, Nightjar wrote:
On 06/05/2015 16:12, whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 May 2015 11:37:32 UTC+1, Dennis@home wrote:
On 06/05/2015 09:10, Bod wrote:
On 05/05/2015 23:08, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:
On 05/05/2015 18:23, Bod wrote:
On 05/05/2015 18:01, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 05/05/2015 16:38, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
and dangerous.......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsWPnpZLiLs


Crikey.

not a nice way to go......


An absailing rope and a point to hook it onto, might be handy for
the
future or even just a rope. At least it would give them a chance of
descending relatively safely.

A rope might burn through. I think I'd prefer a parachute if the
tower
were high enough.

From my parachuting days, I seem to remember that the minimum
height
for a chute to open is about 500ft and that's assuming that the chute
opens perfectly, which is not always the case.

You need a rope and an air brake, just attach to harness and jump, the
rope should survive the few tens of seconds needed.

Its still a bit risky if its windy, then you need the rope to be
attached to the ground.

Would a bungi rope be practical (obviously a slightly advanged one, in
that it's slowly breaks the fall) If you know the hieght would it be
that difficult to design such a thing ?


We obviously need the HSE to step in and regulate these highly dangerous
structures.


yes we need to make sure that they kill less people than nuclear has,

No, because neither of them kill enough to matter.

so every single turbin would need to have safety
equipment installed so people don't get killed by them,

No. What matters is that hardly anyone ends up dead.

and that cost should be added to the cost production
just like any other system for generating power.

It isn't with coal fired power generation.