New UK plan "could spell end of throwaway culture" (BBC News) - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: MyHeadHz
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 03:44:40 am
content: New plan for rules in the UK aim to spell the end of "throwaway culture."https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51825089

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 04:12:37 am
content: Quote from: MyHeadHz on March 11, 2020, 03:44:40 amAre you sure about that ?It seems to be talking about, possible new EU rules, NOT the UK, who have left the EU.It is true, that to some extent, we will still end up with goods, manufactured, to EU standards. But, technically speaking, we will be free (as Brexit becomes increasingly implemented). To buy anything we like, regardless of any future EU rules and regulations.tl;drThe UK is NOT making these new rules, as we left the EU. Also, we DON'T need to listen to them (old rules, will remain in our law books, unless/until officially removed, if we want), either.

author: MyHeadHz
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 04:27:16 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 11, 2020, 04:12:37 amFrom the article (their justification for the quotes): "The plan is being presented by the European Commission. It's likely to create standards for the UK, too - even after Brexit. That's because it probably won't be worthwhile for manufacturers to make lower-grade models that can only be sold in Britain."Whether that will necessarily be true is debatable, but it does look likely. But the specifics of that aside, these laws tend to make big waves everywhere (maybe even the US). It's analogous to how California state emissions standards affect vehicles in other states simply because it doesn't make financial sense to design and support two different models.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 04:34:08 am
content: Quote from: MyHeadHz on March 11, 2020, 04:27:16 amAbsolutely. Yes, I agree, it would tend to have a big, worldwide influence.Louis Rossmann will be pleasedAlong with a whole pile of other people.The extent (in practice) to which the UK follows future EU rules and regulations, is not certain.In theory we don't need to follow them, but practice (governments and their politics) and theory, can easily differ, here.

author: station240
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 04:39:31 am
content: Hopefully this will put an end to companies 'bricking' IoT devices because they cannot be bothered running the server, or because the newer firmware doesn't fit as they nickel and dimed the amount of flash in the micro to the bare minimum.

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 04:44:42 am
content: Quote from: MyHeadHz on March 11, 2020, 03:44:40 amGood! I hope it works. I just hope that the drive to increase reliability and maintainability doesn't get sidetracked into using all "green" (recycled) material. Most of that stuff lasts about as long as a sheet of toilet tissue in the rain!

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 04:56:08 am
content: I prefer, things like cars, washing machines, Microwaves, TVs. To last a reasonably long time. But these days, they can have rather short life expectancies. Which I am disappointed by.E.g. I am led to believe modern (cheap) washing machines are only good for a few years, but I would prefer them to last at least 10 years and be repairable/maintainable (under reasonable usage, NOT commercial or other, high usage, which wears it out faster).Ironically, some of the EU rules, seems to have caused the short product life situation, in the first place.E.g. Lead free solder, can contribute to unreliability of the soldering.Excessive regulations, make the product uneconomically expensive, to make a long life, durable version.E.g. Rules insisting on having tyre pressure monitoring in cars, means each tyre sensor has a battery (4, one for each wheel), which can cost a small fortune, to get replaced, every e.g. 5 years.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 05:41:07 am
content: in order to achieve this they would need to ban chinese made products, since they fall appart before you take them out if the box.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 06:40:38 am
content: The Chinese are fully capable of building excellent quality long lasting goods, but the funny thing is they want you to pay more for it. It isn't China's fault that the average consumer shops by price and buys the cheapest thing they can find even if it will cost them far more in the long run. It's a positive feedback loop where most people buy the cheapest model of something, then all the companies making good stuff have to choose between cutting corners to compete and stay afloat or going out of business. Pretty soon all you can buy is cheap stuff or in some cases *crazy* expensive professional/industrial stuff but the middle is just gone, kind of like we're seeing the middle class vanish leaving only the super weathy and the poor but that's another matter.I would love to see a return of quality, but there is going to be some serious sticker shock involved. I'm not a senior but I am old enough to remember when something like a modest TV set was a substantial investment. I still remember my grandfather taking delivery of a brand new 25" console TV that cost him $600 in around 1984, that was several weeks wages at his middle class job and quite a lot of money back then. When it broke down several years later he paid someone to come repair it because it was economical to do so. Now you can buy a HUGE TV for peanuts and when it breaks in 2 years it's cheaper to just go buy a new one than to have someone repair it. Even as recenly as the late 90s I remember 50"+ TVs costing thousands, people had a lot less stuff in general and paid a lot more for it, I don't see how we can return to that without a major uproar, we are full on addicted to cheap toys.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 09:12:27 am
content: I hope they hit the toy market with this. Particularly things that are really poorly designed and manufactured that come in eggs and piles of packaging and end up in land fill within a month. There are so many companies pushing crap like that at the moment.

author: Ranayna
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 11:12:19 am
content: Quote from: Bud on March 11, 2020, 05:41:07 amHave you seen Dave's latest teardown video?Chinese stuff does not need to be shit, but when you only want to pay for shit...

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 11:24:33 am
content: The best advice i can give anyone when buying china goods.Search for a specific item you want.Order by price lowest to highest.Ignore the lowest grouping of prices entirely,Seriously consider ignoring the 2nd to lowest grouping too.Buy one of the listings in the 3rd price grouping

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 12:42:22 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 11, 2020, 04:56:08 amNot necessarily. My Golf has TPMS which uses the existing ABS sensors to monitor for potential deflation. (I guess a wheel will start dragging more as it loses pressure.) The biggest pain is that these systems tend to require recalibration if you reinflate any tyres, or if you change the tyres, as they "learn" the behaviour of your tyres over time.But this is an example of something that is essentially software only (as all modern cars have ABS) that can provide an additional safety benefit and need not reduce reliability.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 01:11:10 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on March 11, 2020, 12:42:22 pmYou're right about the TPMS systems. I did not give the best of examples (some do use the ABS speed sensors, but I believe most, use battery powered wheel pressure sensors), there. They probably improve safety, which is a good thing.But, what I really meant was. That the huge amount of electronics (and other stuff), which you have on modern cars, these days. A lot of which is due to regulations, such as emission controls, engine start/stop systems, etc.Can mean that cars are uneconomical to keep for long periods of time.Examples...A long time ago e.g. 1960s/70s etc. Cars had simple metal bumpers, which eventually got covered by plastic (and later still, replaced by plastic bumpers).So, if you had a minor car parking **BUMP**, at low speed. Either there was no damage to anything (the earlier plastic bumpers were like that), or it could be repaired (banged back in shape), or if necessary replaced. For a few hundred pounds (or less if you did it yourself).These days, you have a tiny knock on your bumper, and it costs lots of money (thousands of pounds ?, or so I've heard), to get it replaced/repaired.Because of all the parking sensors, driver aid sensors, fog/indicator lights, temperature sensor, daylight sensor, 'radar' vehicle distance sensor (for autonomous cruise control), accident impact absorbing structures (they deform, but then need replacing), and any other stuff, that I've forgotten. Such as cameras (they can be in other places).ECUs (Electronic Control Units), use to be absent, or there were very few of them, on older cars. Maybe transistorised electronic ignition systems, on a 1970s (I could be wrong in the dating of this) car.These days, almost everything, has (or connects to), some kind of ECU.It makes, even small/cheap, cars, fairly interesting these days (i.e. well equipped). But can cost a small fortune, as the vehicle gets older and older, if you want to keep it for a long time.

author: thinkfat
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 01:25:03 pm
content: That's a reason to push for 'Right to Repair' legislation, not reducing the amount of electronics. Most of the regulation makes sense as it pushed manufacturers towards safer, cleaner and more efficient cars.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 01:37:37 pm
content: Quote from: thinkfat on March 11, 2020, 01:25:03 pmYou can say that, and you can believe it. But ...You can't have (I don't want to say it is impossible, but it can get very, very hard) huge functionality (Electronics), very long life, great reliability, fully repairable by someone with zero skills, is 100% safe under all circumstances, meets all the EU regulations, is liked by all drivers etc etc.Then sells for an affordable amount of money.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 02:59:21 pm
content: (I've seen some stuff about this so would expect that) There are many articles/videos and explanations on what has happened over the years.tl;drThe combination of rules (e.g. EU), public desires for ever increasing functionality in cars, and many other factors. Has meant that the latest cars, can "almost" be considered as disposable items, now.QuoteSource:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_longevity

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 07:28:32 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 11, 2020, 02:59:21 pmThis has always been true... if the transmission fails in your 20 year old beater, it is going to the auto wreckers, not the repair shop.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 09:20:28 pm
content: Quote from: SilverSolder on March 11, 2020, 07:28:32 pmActually, 20 years, is pretty good, before the car ends up on the scrap yard.But the latest goods, cars, washing machines, TVs etc. Don't seem to last a long time, like they use to.In the 1990s, you could have bought, those items and others, and they last 20 years, just like you just said (for the car).But these days, the same items, can easily break, fail and be uneconomic to repair, in less than 10 years, in some cases, a lot less than 10 years.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 09:40:50 pm
content: The EU is somewhere around the 3rd largest economy while the UK is around 6th (behind California) so the UK doesn't necessarily have to follow the EU down a rabbit hole. There are other places to trade. This is going to be the case with the US vs EU on an increasing level. We, the US, are not going to legislate the curvature of bananas.As to "Right To Repair", well, sure, as long as it doesn't mean "Give away our IP". In other words, the manufacturers might sell you a pre-programmed chip (for significant money) but they darn sure aren't going to give away the contents. The other thing about "Right To Repair" is "Cost To Repair". I don't get out of bed in the morning for less than $100/hour. How much time can I spend on an obsolete cell phone before it becomes uneconomical.First I have to diagnose the problem. I probably can't bill separately for that but I have time, and hence money, tied up in the repair before the customer even agrees to pay something. Assume they do... Then I have to order the parts (assuming I don't stock every chip on the market) and then I wait. Maybe in a month or so, I get the parts and then in a day or two I can fix the widget. Does the customer want to be out of the widget using business for a long period of time or do they just walk away. There's a lot of huffing and puffing about "Right To Repair" (primarily by Rossman) but, in the end, it doesn't make financial sense. There aren't any radio repair shops around and there hasn't been in around 50 years. TV repair shops have been gone for nearly as long. I remember being able to buy schematics for the old tube type sets but once transistors came around the schematics became fewer and fewer. With application specific integrated circuits, I don't know if they are available at all these days.What if the parts are no longer obtainable - like some Tektronix specific chips? It doesn't matter what you want to do about "Right To Repair" if the parts are obsolete. I guess you could mandate that manufacturers had to stock repair parts as long as their product is in use, or 50 years, whichever came first. Sure, that's going to work!It's going to be interesting when the UK is outside the Common Market. The EU will still try to throw their weight around but sooner or later, they're going to run up against real economies. They're sellers, not buyers and they should keep that in mind.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2020, 10:44:20 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on March 11, 2020, 09:40:50 pmIt's not really about you though, less than $100/hr may not motivate you, but for the vast majority of the people the planet that is considerably more than they will ever earn and it may be economical to expend far more effort.I don't really expect companies to give away their IP, but for the vast majority of consumer electronics I'm not sure the IP is really all that valuable. Much of the heavy lifting is done by open source stuff anyway and a lot of the firmware in simpler devices is something that any number of engineers could replicate if they wanted. Making programmed devices available is probably sufficient though, and even just having a schematic would enable a lot of repairs. My experience has been that the expensive, unobtainable and difficult to test custom part is rarely the problem.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 12:47:27 am
content: Some alternate economics. That twenty year old beater may only be worth $1500. And a new transmission might cost $2000 or more. So many will say it isn't worth it to put a new transmission in. And I agree if you are a re-seller. You will never recover your costs. But if you are a user of transportation you already own a vehicle, which unfortunately doesn't work right now. So your choices are to buy a new (presently working) beater for about $1500 which will have an unknown service life. Or put $2000 into your beater and have a known good transmission and perhaps reason to believe other parts are working well. Or put $25,000 into a new vehicle (which will also have higher insurance, licensing and other costs). With this analysis it might well make sense to put that transmission in.Seems like the "throwaway" moniker needs to be used with some care and precision. From the 1970's to the 1990's personal computers made no sense to repair. Because technology was moving so fast that by the time something broke you didn't want it anyway. As performance growth slowed repairing/upgrading made more sense. Improved efficiency in freezers and air-conditioners has reduced operating costs enough to make replacement make economic sense. Adding costs to the disposal chain (which I believe is the mechanism for these attacks on throw away culture) may actually make sense. But it puts you in the uncomfortable position of forcing continued use old, inefficient devices because it costs too much to dispose of them. Dumping CO2 into the atmosphere to avoid dumping plastic in the landfills.

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 01:03:54 am
content: Cars are bad examples, as there is an incentive to replace and renew them in order to meet emissions standards. I can think of better examples of throwaway items:Retrofit LED bulbs.Single use battery banks for recharging phones.Coffee pods.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 01:53:46 am
content: Quote from: John B on March 12, 2020, 01:03:54 amThe problem is, getting rid of such items, needs a huge world wide culture change. Getting that to occur, especially in the free world. Is not going to be easy.In the UK, we were using/consuming and throwing away, far too many shopping, one time use (typically), plastic carrier bags. So, not too long ago, our government, introduced a 5p per bag, forced charge, especially in supermarkets. (The bags use to be free, in most supermarkets).So, at least some people, bring long life, multi-use heavy duty bags, with them, to the supermarket, these days, in the UK.This has reduced the consumption of plastic bags, very dramatically.But the thing is, to "save planet Earth". We in all likelihood need to take considerably more dramatic action, across the board. This is not likely to be too popular, with the voting public. I'm not sure exactly what the solution is going to be.Maybe we need to go back to living in caves, and use DNA engineering, to reintroduce dinosaurs. Then the next coronavirus, will only affect one of the (approx) 200 villager population communities, just like it would have. Back in the stone age, before jetting off to foreign countries was an everyday occurrence.We can then ride the dinosaurs, instead of using cars. They would probably make great prehistoric war fighting machines as well. You can charge into battle riding your tamed dinosaurs, and crush your enemies, while using your zero emissions (ok, a bit of natural CO2, will be breathed out) dinosaurs 'tank' like battle machine.Edit: typo corrected

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 02:44:33 am
content: I don't see the issue with retrofit LED bulbs. I retrofitted my entire house from 2011-2013 and can count on one hand the bulbs I've replaced since then. Even the ones that have run dusk till dawn every night in my porch lights and other outside lights are still going strong. I bought quality bulbs from Philips and Cree and they have served me very well, and I didn't have to throw away all my nice fixtures. Additionally since they all use standard sockets, changing the light output, color temperature, or other characteristics is as simple as changing a bulb.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 02:53:56 am
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on March 12, 2020, 12:47:27 amYes, I agree with this analysis. The cost of actually changing a vehicle (time, risk, and $$$) can make it worth spending "theoretically too much" to fix.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 02:59:20 am
content: Quote from: SilverSolder on March 12, 2020, 02:53:56 amIt almost always makes sense provided you have taken reasonable care of the rest of the car. I've never understood the "but it costs more to fix than the vehicle is worth". So what? With few exceptions a car is not an investment, you're always going to pour much more money into it than you get back out later if you sell it. That's especially true if you buy brand new cars, you lose tens of thousands of dollars in value. I don't even know how I'd manage to spend that much repairing my car. I don't care how much I could sell it for because I'm never going to sell it, I'll spend the money to maintain it and just keep driving it until someone hits me and wrecks it again.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 03:00:17 am
content: Quote from: james_s on March 12, 2020, 02:44:33 amI don't see a problem with LED bulbs either...*Buys cheap bulbs from dollar store like most average folk*They seem to last just fine...*porch light burns out after just a few years*Ok...nevermind...

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 08:27:45 am
content: Some of them are pretty crappy to be honest. Usual failure mode I see is the thermal compound being applied poorly and one of the LED chips burns out. That is as always due to them being really shit bottom rung units made to a price point so they can be sold to idiots in dollar stores / pound shops though.Our race to the bottom economics are the reason these things exist. Plus you make more money shipping volume than quality so the incentive to make barely fit for purpose products with a high margin and guaranteed repeat customers is higher than single shot products.Real problems that we need to deal with are these though:1. Disposable kids toys2. Printer cartridges3. Retail and food packaging4. Deep supply chainsEdit: just on a point here. I buy Philips bulbs and they’re all nearly 10 years old now and still good. The aforementioned idiots actually bring me their £1 light bulbs and then ask me to fix them because they’ve seen an oscilloscope sitting on my desk

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 08:49:47 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on March 12, 2020, 07:20:04 amPerhaps the idea is not something the Chinese would accept but these are everywhere in the UK and the very idea of throwing away a perfectly reusable Li-Ion cell and DC-DC converter, with all the plastic casing components after just two hours of use just disgusts me.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 09:43:02 am
content: Obviously, cheap nasty signal use products such as torches with non-replaceable batteries and disposable phone chargers should be banned.I don't see any problems with hygiene and children's toys, which should be designed to survive many wash cycles at 90oC and being sterilised in chlorine solution.Food packaging isn't quite so clear cut. Sometimes using plastic packaging increases the shelf life, thus cutting waste, but it's often unnecessary. It depends on the product so isn't something which can be easily regulated.https://www.letsrecycle.com/news/latest-news/plastic-reduction-wrap-food/

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 09:47:54 am
content: Have you seen the state of children's toys these days?Look at hatchimals. 20% of the packaging is plastic waste. Then once the toy has hatched, the shell goes in the bin (another 20% mass), then the damn thing fucks up after a month and goes in the bin. £40 down the shitter. I'm glad mine all like tech now which is mostly recyclable thanks to WEEE regulations. Oh and then there's shit like aquabeads which is basically a whole plastic wrapped in non recyclable films in a box made of plastic which goes in the fucking bin. And I haven't started on high value lines of collectable crap figures. Go watch a TV advert break on CITV or something to get an idea of the crap.I got lego when I was a kid. That was durable, reusable, creative and educational and in fact 30 years after the fact I sold most of it to people who wanted to reuse it.

author: donotdespisethesnake
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 02:40:08 pm
content: I can't really see how to legislate for "repairable". Who is to judge that? And even if products are theoretical repairable, who is going to check that the spare parts actually are available and at reasonable cost from the manufacturers? Will companies have to commit to supporting all products made for X years, including those of businesses they acquire?I guess that it happen like WEEE. Some fine words are printed, the net effect is to add a cost/red tape burden to manufacturers, a pain for the smaller ones and the larger ones will just absorb the cost by paying money to some third party. Consumers will then be told actually neither the shops nor manufacturers accept e-waster, you are supposed to take it the council site, promised kerbside collections never actually get done.The council transfer to the waste to private companies who just ship it to the third world and dump it in a field, then just set fire to it.The reason products became non-repairable, is because modern mass production techniques have heavily optimised for material cost and assembly time. Disassembly is no longer the reverse of assembly. Reversing that trend would make products more expensive, and reduce sales. Manufacturers will make the calculation that profits will be better if they continue selling cheap non-repairable stuff, and paying some sort of "repair tax".

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 03:46:23 pm
content: Quote from: donotdespisethesnake on March 12, 2020, 02:40:08 pmPerhaps that's what's required to protect the environment? More expensive products, less stuff being made and less waste.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 03:53:32 pm
content: That's inevitable anyway with a growing population and a fixed quantity of resources which will increase in scarcity at some point. As a species we like to stick our fingers in our ears or point at the sky when that is mentioned but really it's just going to get pretty ugly pretty quickly one day. Recycling is really just a parachute fall instead of a free fall because it's not 100% efficient.This is all propelled by the attitude of "who gives a fuck I'll be dead then" while filling their cars up with dead dinosaurs, driving home and switching on the air con powered by more dead dinosaurs

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 04:07:19 pm
content: LED lamp life is very much dependant on the type of light unit it's installed in. If there is free air flow around the lamp, it is likely to last a reasonable time, although I doubt any will last into the 10's of thousands of hours that is often claimed. The lamps I've had fitted in light units with restricted air flow have never reached even a 1000 hours, some as little as a few hundred. What will ultimately dictate longevity is the dreaded capacitor in the PSU, the LED chips themselves, if of good quality could potentially go for 1000's of hours, but the caps will prevent that. Any LED's I've had in outside fitments do about 6 months before they fail. Overall, incandescent bulbs have LED's beat for longevity in my experience, but at a cost!

author: HobGoblyn
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 04:17:50 pm
content: While not a repairable point as such, I recently bought a new dyson hand held vacuum cleaner.None of the accessories from my older model fitted, very very slightly different, the only reason for this that I can see is that dyson has deliberately slightly altered the fittings so that people are forced to chuck all the old accessories away and buy new ones.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 04:58:00 pm
content: Dyson prices are just outrageous!! Circa £400 or more for a vacuum cleaner, hairdryer or fan, WTF!!! Full marks for their PR, advertising and marketing crap that persuades people to pay those prices though, very clever!!

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 05:20:09 pm
content: Quote from: donotdespisethesnake on March 12, 2020, 02:40:08 pmThere's some simple, easily achieved improvements to be had here, which wouldn't be at all difficult to describe in legislation.For example, not too long ago, the phone in my pocket had a sliding battery cover which was trivial to remove. The battery was clipped into place and could be easily swapped out with no technical skill whatsoever. Nowadays almost every phone on the market has an integral battery which cannot be replaced without special tools and a risk of permanent damage to the phone - and there'snogood reason for them to be made that way.Or, look at laptops. For years it was entirely normal to be able to replace the battery, upgrade the HDD, install more memory and so on. Now that's still possible in some models, but others are soldered and glued all in the name of making them fractionally thinner.Last year my washing machine packed up, 13 years old (which was disappointing, but could have been worse). The component which failed was only available as part of the complete drum assembly, cost around £600 and completely uneconomic. That wasn't so bad; the real problem was finding a replacement machine which didn't have a sealed drum and a design life expectancy of 5 years or less.All these limitations could easily be overcome with minor design changes to the products in question. Manufacturers don't do it for economic reasons, and because for each of them, being the one manufacturer to do so would put them at a competitive disadvantage. Apply legislation that's the same for everyone, though, and that objection goes away, and every consumer benefits.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 05:21:57 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on March 12, 2020, 04:58:00 pmWhich allows them not to directly compete with the low-cost gear market, which is the real clever part here.It's not just about margin. It's about market positioning.

author: thinkfat
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 06:10:18 pm
content: It's not regulations that make cars expensive and unreliable. It's the "race to the bottom" that you get everywhere within our economic system. You don't get the "best" product, you get the product that makes the most profit for a manufacturer. Regardless of safety of operation as I might add. Example: Boeing. You know how manufacturers recall products for safety hazards: Only if the expected cost of lawsuits outweighs the cost of fixing the defect. Regulation steps in there and forces manufacturers into complying to certain standards. In the Boeing example, the authority got too tangled up with the manufacturer and failed their own processes. But that doesn't void the need.The cars we can buy now are the result of manufacturers desperately trying to differentiate in a replacement market: Everybody who can afford it already has a car. So we're urged to buy a new car in ever shorter intervals to keep this business model afloat. It's not sustainable and manufacturers are trying to find replacements: Transportation as a Service is one such model.I wouldn't be able to fix a carburetor. Or adjust it in a satisfactory fashion. But in the past you'd be able to call up an expert and have it done for money. The manufacturer will not do it, it's not in his interest (or you will pay from the mouth for it). Example: Apple doesn't fix iPhones. They coerce you into buying a new phone. It's not in their interest to extend the service life of their products. They want, need, you to buy a new phone. The won't rescue your data from a phone that fell into the toilet, they will provide a cloud backup service for money.But nowadays it's becoming difficult to find an expert to fix your stuff, because the manufacturer makes it difficult on purpose. By withholding information and parts. There are people that can fix ECUs. There are people who could fix broken Teslas with failing eMMC chips. It's difficult, but it can be done. If parts, documentation and tools were available. This is what the Right to Repair is about.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 06:35:43 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 12, 2020, 05:21:57 pmWhich is lying about the benefits and quality of the product.

author: Cubdriver
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 07:04:37 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on March 12, 2020, 04:07:19 pmWhat kind of LEDs are you running? I have about 95% of my house switched over to them for better than 7 years now, and can't think of more than perhaps 1 or 2 failures. Several are in outdoor fixtures (including fixtures that are turned on automatically at dusk and run for 4-8 hours per day, and have been doing so since 2012), and they have never failed. Most are Philips or Cree, or Eco-Smart (I believe that's a Home Depot 'house' brand), and all, in my experience, have been near faultless.-Pat

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 08:10:27 pm
content: I have about a half dozen LED bulbs that are already >10,000 hours and still going strong. I can't comment on the "tens of thousands of hours" claim because I haven't had them long enough yet but so far so good, I've gotten my moneys worth, those heavily used bulbs have paid for themselves already several times over.Regarding Dyson, they are expensive but I bought both my regular upright and my cordless vacuums on sale at a price that while higher than many vacuums, was quite a bit cheaper than they usually cost and they have been fantastic, I have very few complaints. I spent more overall on cheaper vacuums that I was never happy with and in retrospect should have just bought the Dyson in the first place, it's the only bagless vacuum I've owned that wasn't more trouble than it's worth. I can't speak for their marketing because I've never seen it, I don't watch TV and I don't think they are heavily marketed in the US. Someone I know who had one suggested I check them out so I did, 10 years later I'm still happy with my purchase. It's funny when I hear people who will drop $15k on an oscilloscope complain about a few hundred bucks for another tool you will use regularly for years.

author: blacksheeplogic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 09:22:39 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on March 12, 2020, 08:27:45 amThe eco printers with refillable ink bottles are difficult to find here and I were on close out sales. Why? - the self righteous everyone else should buy $300 printers but I will continue to buy the cheap $30 printer, after all 'I' can just throw the printer out when it runs out of ink.If you want to actually do something about instead of this cheap political talk, go walk the walk and start supporting products like printers with refillable ink bottles and maybe if enough consumers start actually spending the extra manufactures will put more of these products back in the market.My view is if your not supporting the cost of re-usability, stop preaching....

author: blacksheeplogic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 09:28:32 pm
content: Quote from: AndyC_772 on March 12, 2020, 05:20:09 pmThis has probably made negligible real difference. Basic market research showed consumers 'upgrading' there phones, they weren't replacing their phone batteries and using 10 year old phones. Sure a few do, But there's a ton of consumers who will say 'yea, if I had the option', but when they had the option..... different story, that what everyone else should do.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 09:57:31 pm
content: On reflection, I'm increasingly thinking, this (almost a) disposable car situation is probably where we have been headed to, for a large number of reasons.Let's consider the cars side mirrors.The mirrors of cars from many decades ago, were just that, 'mirrors'. If it needed replacing, e.g. a parking accident. You just needed to change the mirror glass (fairly cheap, £7 ?), or the complete unit, which was also probably reasonably priced, many decades ago.These days, you usually have an incredible amount of functionality, crammed into the limited space mirror.They can be electrically heated, electrically adjustable, flashes when someone indicates (part of the assembly), is electrically retractable/foldable. They can also, detect passing vehicles (electronically), have cameras in (I suspect, possibly lane change detection), and probably other stuff.So, in order to put all that functionality into a relatively small space. You have to have assemblies, with lots of stuff on PCBs. Many motors, mechanical bits, sensors, heater(s), etc etc.Therefore, instead of the old days, when it hypothetically can be repaired for £7 (guesstimate of many decades ago pricing), by buying a new mirror glass. The whole unit probably needs replacing, and it probably costs a small fortune, to get it repaired (changed).

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 11:41:05 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 12, 2020, 09:57:31 pmThe solution to this and similar problems is both simple and impossible. Simple in that a standardized unit used by everyone would be relatively inexpensive due to large production volume. Repair of the unit would be possible for the same reason (big market). But this will never happen because everyone wants unique style and features to differentiate their car from the neighbors and competitors.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2020, 11:57:39 pm
content: I hold out hope that eventually we'll have a trend toward minimalist cars, cars that are just cars, without the extra 1,400 pounds of silly gadgets to break. Things like these ridiculous power actuated tailgates that take 5 times as long to open and close as just manually lifting and closing the gate on the back of a wagon or SUV, it's dumb. Infotainment units integrated into the car are completely stupid, just provide a place to plug in a smartphone which everyone already has anyway and use that for navigation.The lack of bumpers is probably the dumbest trend ever though. The entire purpose of a bumper is to absorb minor impacts and prevent damage to the expensive painted bodywork. They should be rugged plain black polymer over a sturdy shock mounted frame that protrudes several inches past the bodywork with an inexpensive and easily replaceable outer cladding. There is no excuse for these stupid jokes that modern cars have where the entire end of the car is a sacrificial structure and a minor parking lot bump can easily cost you thousands. It's purely form over function, it was great back when the law required bumpers that could absorb a 5mph collision without damage, yeah they were big and ugly on some cars so maybe 2.5mph that we had later is more reasonable but what we have now is ridiculous.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 12:03:31 am
content: Quote from: james_s on March 12, 2020, 02:59:20 amSadly, rust is a big problem in some parts of the country, it ends up killing otherwise perfectly functional cars...

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 12:10:40 am
content: Quote from: SilverSolder on March 13, 2020, 12:03:31 amYes rust is a huge problem and I want to scream whenever it (rarely) snows around here and someone inevitably starts moaning that they need to salt the roads. Finally in recent years they relented and did start salting some roads, thankfully I can now take the bus to work as I refuse to drive in salt. I think people have absolutely no idea how badly salt destroys their cars, easily causing billions of dollars in damage a year. On top of that it causes further billions in damage to infrastructure, I visited Chicago recently and was shocked to see so many newish cars with gaping holes rotted in the wheel arches and all the bridges, light posts and everything else was rusted and nasty.I just don't get it, a set of good snow tires and a few plows is far cheaper than everyone buying a new car every few years. Stainless or aluminum floorpans and body panels could help a lot too, unfortunately most people are too dumb to realize that paying 50% more for a car that lasts 3 times as long is a sound investment.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 12:16:02 am
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on March 12, 2020, 11:41:05 pmWhat we need to save the planet, and to get from A to B, in the way of a car. Is a simple, small/tiny modern day version of the Ford Model T, 'any colour you like, as long as it's black'.E.g. Like the original UK Mini, a getting from A to B car, with nothing extra. Modernised, of course, not like the old one in the picture.Rather than what some people really get, such as ...The cost to the planet, between just what we would need to get from A to B, and these huge, vehicles, is just plain crazy!

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 12:17:25 am
content: Quote from: tom66 on March 12, 2020, 08:49:47 amIt seems like much could be accomplished by banning this sort of utterly stupid stuff that nobody really needs vs so much banning and regulating of things that have a larger impact on people. I can think of no reason that something like a disposable charger should exist, a reusable charger that uses disposable alkaline or zinc chloride batteries would be bad enough. Actually as someone who has bought disposable batteries of any sort maybe 3 or 4 times in the last decade I'm a bit surprised there hasn't been a push to eliminate them or tax them heavily to discourage their use. Modern NiMH and Li-ion batteries are very good and there are very few applications for which they are not suitable but the typical consumer is incapable of looking at the big picture and only sees the higher up front cost. Once you own a charger and have an ecosystem of NiMH cells in the house it becomes a total non-issue, you've always got fresh batteries on hand.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 12:21:43 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 13, 2020, 12:16:02 amThe biggest problem that I see is that I (and probably most people) would be terrified to drive around in a tiny deathtrap like that in a sea of gigantic penis-compensating trucks and SUVs. I would be happy to see cars in general shift toward smaller and lighter weight, but it needs to be a widespread shift. Right now even driving my Volvo which was a very large car by European standards when it was built, I can't see around all these tall crossover SUVs everyone has and even things like the drive through mail drop at the post office has recently been raised up to where I can barely reach it without getting out of my car. I'll be glad when that fad ends.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 12:30:24 am
content: Quote from: james_s on March 13, 2020, 12:21:43 amWhich makes it a viscous circle.'I'll fix my behaviour, as soon as everyone else fixes their's first'.So maybe unappetising legislation, will get us out of this viscous circle. But that could take a lot longer, than the planet takes, for mother nature, to reek her revenge.We are already seeing terrible weather round the world at times, e.g. Bad flooding in the UK, Out of control forest fires in Australia, Ice caps melting, etc.I wonder if the Corona Virus, has got any connection to what we are doing to the planet. Maybe overpopulation and too much international flying, are factors.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 01:13:07 am
content: Well I'm already driving a modest (by modern standards) car and I personally average about 50 miles a month these days since I commute by bus so I'm hardly the problem. It's possible that smaller/lower cars will come back into style at some point, it has happened before.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 01:28:07 am
content: Quote from: james_s on March 13, 2020, 01:13:07 amDesktop PC computers, use to be relatively huge, in big tower cases.But (fortunately), massive big Tower PCs are getting rarer and rarer these days, replaced by ever smaller formats, such as tablets, laptops, and various types of mini or size reduced PCs.When/if we go to (or are forced to) have all electric vehicles. Those will favour small versions (but big enough to have room for batteries with reasonable capabilities), to give the best ranges, speed (less drag), performance (less weight) and reduce costs. Although, Tesla, have already showcased a massive 'Truck' like, version of their new or upcoming offerings. So, maybe not,

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 01:36:55 am
content: I don't know why it's fortunate (or matters) that tower PCs are getting rarer, I still find it hard to beat a traditional tower if one needs a powerful and easily expandable machine, though obviously with components shrinking these don't have to be as massive as they used to be.Cars are a bit different though, to a point the physical size of a car is dictated by the stuff you want to fit inside it. For a commuter car or for a single person without a lot of stuff a very small car is probably fine. Many of us need something a tad larger, I don't need or want a gigantic SUV but I love my station wagon and I utilize it very frequently for transporting large objects, camping gear, materials and supplies, etc. My little brother has a Fiat Abarth which is a great little car but since he has gotten more heavily into photography he's finding that he can't fit all his gear in it. Somebody with a few kids is going to need something larger than a subcompact to comfortably haul around the family, especially if the kids are into sports, band, or other common things that require some cargo space. Very, very few people need a huge SUV though, I'd love to see the return of proper station wagons, they are the perfect practical car for people like me. Loads of interior space, highly versatile, yet no larger footprint than a regular sedan. Sadly they are all but extinct.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 02:45:17 am
content: You can still get station wagons... but they are taller, and are called "crossovers"!

author: I wanted a rude username
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 03:00:23 am
content: I believe the correct term is "minivans".

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 03:23:44 am
content: Quote from: james_s on March 13, 2020, 01:36:55 amFortunate, because tiny computers, should take much less resources to produce, than full sized ones.If you want to have a 64 core monster (AMD threadripper) computer, with water cooling, multiple oversized graphics cards, many disk dirves/SSDs, and huge potential for expansion. Then, a large tower case is still the way to go. (I know even threadrippers can be achieved in small cases, if you want to go that route).But these days, a mini sized computer can still be rather powerful, for most things, people do, 99% of the time.I'm NOT clear, if a really tiny mini-itx computer, can be as reliable and long lasting, as the full sized desktop equivalents. But, if it achieves decent cooling, and you don't go for too high a wattage cpu (these days even 8 cores, can be rated for 65 Watts, or less), it can theoretically be done.Quote from: james_s on March 13, 2020, 01:36:55 amI agree. Some people, need certain capabilities, from their vehicles. But many people, seem to have giant vehicles, without any real life NEED as such, and don't even go off-road, ever (as regards what we call 4 wheel drive, in the UK or 4 X 4's). I.e. Range Rovers etc. (SUV in US terminology).Even if you need the massive vehicle, perhaps the planet can't sustain the resources needed to create it and keep it on the road. So we need to limit, who has them.tl;drSomehow, we need to keep people 'free' and choose how they go about their lives. Yet keep planet Earth running in a smooth, efficient and sustainable way.Maybe there is a Nobel prize, for the person who can solve that problem.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 08:17:16 am
content: I think the issue of vehicles is down to misinterpretation of the word “need”. A lot of people build a straw man around necessity to build a case for what they really just want. I don’t actually really “need” a car. It’s just a convenience that can drag me to a few places that are inconvenient to get to without one. I’m guilty tooAs for tower PCs I have one, a 100W TDP Ryzen, and it’s an energy drinking nightmare of a machine. Unfortunately I need some grunt for what I do. But at the same time I work from home so I’m having less of an impact on the environment as far as transport goes.We all need to look at our impact. Perhaps you don’t need a Mercedes E class to drop the kids off at school. That’s probably most of the problems around here summed up at least....

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 11:23:05 am
content: Quote from: james_s on March 12, 2020, 02:44:33 amYep, a quality LED bulb with psu should last 10 years, even up to 15 years if they design it properly and pick the correct parts.True, the light output and color temp will change as the LED ages, but it should still work.The primary reason you see store bought LED lamps dying within a year or two is simply planned obsolescence, they're engineered to run way to hot so they can sell the replacements. The caps and semiconductors just cannot handle the heat they're run at.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 01:09:40 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 13, 2020, 12:16:02 amThat's not what "they" want you to do... they want you to keep paying high monthly payments on a much fancier car than you actually need, to keep the economy going!

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 01:32:46 pm
content: Quote from: SilverSolder on March 13, 2020, 01:09:40 pmYes, that's true.One of the very famous (in electronics circles) people, Bob Peace (Robert Allen Pease). Famously, always drove round in an ancient (and probably battered), old beetle car (despite being rather wealthy). I.e. He was probably immune to the 'buy an expensive flashy car' syndrome, despite being able to easily buy an expensive car.Sadly, with double irony, when he drove to the funeral (technically speaking, it was actually just AFTER the funeral, on the way back home) of another famous electronics gurus (Jim Williams (analog_designer) ). He crashed (some said his old beetle would not be safe in an accident). Unfortunately they were right, and he went to the same place the magic smoke goes, when electronic components reach an untimely death, through massive overload.People do seem to buy/get flashy/excessive cars, due to some psychological effect. Paying excessive amounts of money.Yet with other things. E.g. LED lights, they are happy to buy a 'get 2 for a $1 pack'. Then, complain when it doesn't last the 35,000+ hours it says on the pack.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 05:28:32 pm
content: Quote from: Psi on March 13, 2020, 11:23:05 amI have not observed a change in light output or color temperature so far. I recently pulled the Philips 8W remote phosphor bulb that I installed in 2011 out of my front porch light and lit it up right next to a NOS one that I never installed, they were indistinguishable. The porch light runs every night from dusk till dawn so after 9 years it has quite a few hours on it.I don't think it's planned obsolescence, it's cost engineering. I paid over $30 *each* for the Philips bulbs, part of that is I was an early adopter trying to support a product I believed in and wanted to succeed, but beyond just being new they were also very well engineered and made to last a long time. Now you can get LED bulbs for a few dollars or less, some of that his due to high volume production and improved technology, but much is also from cutting corners to cut the cost down to the bare minimum. You can't buy the cheapest of the cheap crap and then expect it to last.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 05:45:21 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 13, 2020, 03:23:44 amI'm not so sure that it's significant. Large tower computers are filled mostly with air, and much of the other mass is cheap and easily recycled steel and other metals. The modern super compact PCs have a large portion of their volume consumed by PCBs and silicon, and I suspect the difference in total volume of material that is not easily recycled is minimal. Another factor worth considering, when PCs were still being upgraded regularly I would often replace only some of the components, I kept the same tower case for more than a decade. The mini PCs are far more proprietary, they are essentially disposable, when one breaks you throw the whole thing out.

author: OwO
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 05:45:52 pm
content: Bulbs over 8 watts run too hot, and with the typical light output of 8W bulbs it would take 12 bulbs to cover the living room, so it gets expensive real fast (if you can even find fixtures that large). If they last 10 years on average, that's still one bulb replacement per year. I really prefer the big rectangular ceiling lights with huge surface area and using LED strips; it's less painful to look at too.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 05:52:29 pm
content: Quote from: SilverSolder on March 13, 2020, 02:45:17 amA crossover is no more a station wagon than a spork is a spoon. A crossover is a one size fits all compromise, it looks vaguely like an SUV, vaguely like a station wagon, vaguely like a hatchback, vaguely like a minivan, etc but it is none of these things. They are somehow taller without offering any more ground clearance or interior volume, I don't even know where all the space goes. I find them all hideously ugly and could never bring myself to own one. I have hauled a sofa in the back of my Volvo 740 that would not fit in my friend's Toyota crossover, and I have hauled plywood and lumber using a clamp on roof rack, the car is low enough that I can easily load and unload without needing to stand on a ladder. The boxy shape is ideal for maximizing internal volume vs external footprint, there's a reason that boxes are box-shaped.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2020, 05:56:17 pm
content: Quote from: OwO on March 13, 2020, 05:45:52 pmI have lots of 12.5W Philips bulbs, those are all at least 8 years old now and I haven't had any of them fail yet. The big rectangular fixtures make sense in some circumstances but they wouldn't look right in my house.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 12:09:14 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on March 13, 2020, 05:34:52 pmThat makes sense. LEDs have been dropping in price a lot, over the years.Maybe my example was not the best.A better example, could have been a $0.10 screwdriver. These typically, bend the shaft with the slightest load, and the tip bends/breaks, with the slightest resistance from a screw. Then the handle falls off.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 12:15:16 am
content: Quote from: james_s on March 13, 2020, 05:52:29 pmThe Honda Odyssey is a pretty good load carrier, they have an amazing 4' by 8' cargo area when the seats are out...

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 12:32:18 am
content: Quote from: james_s on March 13, 2020, 05:45:21 pmI agree mini PCs, are unsuitable for much upgrading (future proofing), beyond some RAM and/or SSD upgrades.They seem a lot lighter, which makes me think they use less materials, but you have raised some good points, about the extra recyclability of desktops.They also tend to use a lot less electricity, compared to their older, desktop cousins. Which is another way, they can be saving the planet.But I agree, they not only are somewhat disposable. But may be replaced, rather than repaired or upgraded, a lot sooner than desktop PCs. Further complicating their recycling green credentials.I guess this discussion/thread, shows how difficult it is. To know the best way of saving the planet.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 02:56:56 pm
content: Quote from: AndyC_772 on March 12, 2020, 05:20:09 pmThere are three I can think of right off the bat:One, which frankly isn't relevant to most people, but is critical to some*, is size and weight: a battery compartment adds thickness and weight, since another layer of separation must be provided between the user-facing battery compartment and the innards.Second, watertightness. It is exceedingly difficult to make a watertight battery compartment. (Even more so if it needs to be thin and light.) It's vastly easier to seal the entire device. A strong argument can be made that by making phones watertight, you prevent a ton of e-waste, on account of all the prevented device drownings.Third, battery safety. With modern battery energy densities, battery failure can be catastrophic. By sealing the batteries inside, manufacturers dramatically reduce the chance that an aftermarket battery of unknown quality is installed. Additionally, and arguably more importantly, it completely eliminates the chance of somebody carrying spare batteries with them in an unsafe manner. Now, I'm not insinuating thatmostaftermarket batteries are unsafe, or thatmostpeople who'd carry a spare battery would go up in flames. But it's also absolutely guaranteed that it would increase the number of incidents. Both from a public safety standpoint as well as from a corporate liability standpoint, I completely understand why companies have moved to sealed-in batteries.*More with laptops than phones, but if someone has a physical limitation that makes weight an issue, the added weight of a thicker, more serviceable laptop might be prohibitive.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 03:38:43 pm
content: My phone+case is already between 2 and 3 times as thick as the phone itself; thinness as a figure of merit has become silly. An extra mm or two to accommodate the thickness of a battery cover would be perfectly fine with me, I don't think I'd even notice.The number of early deaths due to water ingress through the battery compartment would have to be weighed against the number saved by being (easily) opened and dried straight away. If you can't make a phone competely water tight - and most aren't - the next best thing you can do is make it trivial to remove the battery, open the case, and dry out the PCB immediately. This is something that's possible with a product designed for serviceability, but if your laptop or phone is glued together, forget it.I don't doubt that manufacturers would cry "safety" if compelled to make batteries removable, but that's a reason to come up with a safer form factor for the battery, not to continue designing in obsolescence. If batteries for laptops and power tools can have embedded contacts that are protected from accidental contact, so can phones.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 04:02:38 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 13, 2020, 01:32:46 pmThe car thing is easy to explain. Main reason is PCH plans. People can buy (borrow actually) cars that with conventional purchasing methods they could not afford. So, to anethiatise themselves against their otherwise pointless, trivial lives, they fall for all the 'lifestyle' guff from car manufacturers and buy a Merc, or Audi, or BMW etc and wallow in all the false status. Like that even matters, especially when they park the shiny expensive toy outside some grotty terrace in nowheresville. Then the main thing they use it for is sitting in traffic jams commuting to their souless jobs in a call center, or some other brain dead, no skill job. Same applies to all the other pointless trinkets they are brainwashed into thinking life cannot be complete without, like the latest Apple whatever BS product, or Dyson £400 hairdryer, etc, etc.Rant over, now where is that latest Fluke catalogue

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 06:23:23 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on March 14, 2020, 04:02:38 pmOf course, that makes lots of sense. You are reminding me of many things, where this 'psychological' effect, is exploited by marketing teams.I'm happy with a mobile phone, that meets my needs. If that is a non-Apple £50 .. £400 phone, then that's fine for me.But, others, such as Apple buyers, are apparently happy to pay double or more for the same phone (functionality wise).How on earth it has got to£1,000(just looked it up, they can now be £1,499 for an Apple phone, 'Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max, iOS, 6.5", 4G LTE, SIM Free, 512GB, Silver £1,499.00' John Lewis Website) just for a phone, I'm a bit out of touch.So it reminds me of a long time ago (few decades), when you could get decent jeans for relatively little money. Yet many would insist on paying considerably more for genuine 'Wrangler' or 'Levis' jeans (I may have got the makes wrong).Somehow there were many Jean fanboys of that era, who insisted that they were better, than the non-famously branded ones.tl;drBasic needs such as food/air/water/shelter (truth) vs claimed needs (probably wants really) such as oversized SUV/pickup trucks (what marketing companies want you to buy).I was going to jokingly mention that marketing wants you to buy the latest Apple iCar, only to discover, it may actually exist for real (rumour).https://www.macworld.co.uk/news/apple/apple-car-3425394/

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 06:47:49 pm
content: £1500 is too much for me. That's unnecessary. However less is fine.When AppleCare runs out on mine I will shift it and buy a new one. I pay ~ £1000 for a phone every 2 years. At the moment I'd buy a 128gb iPhone 11 if I needed one for £929 including apple care. But honestly I actually extract the entire value from it. I spent 4-5 hours a day on the phone, run my entire business from it, run my entire life off the thing, run my entire job off the thing, use it as an entertainment device when I'm stuck away from home, use it for navigation in the car and when I'm hill walking, use it as a payment device, do my financial spreadsheets on it, do my banking on it, manage my eating, communicate with my family and probably use it for music 7 hours a day. When it's done I still get at least £250 back when I sell it. If I break it I can get it replaced the same day for a minimum premium.All that for a quid a day is a fucking bargain!Issue is MOSTLY people who tend to buy a £1500 phone and use it for whatsapp.Tesla is a subscription car

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 07:06:00 pm
content: I can see your point about the Apple iPhone, it makes a lot of sense.On the other hand, leaving out a microSD card slot(s), is almost certainly a marketing ploy (in many peoples opinions). To get people to get the higher flash capacity ones, at a much higher price.Is a top of the range, £500 (or whatever the price is these days), Samsung (or whatever the best non-Apple phone is), really that bad ?I think the google phone is suppose to be good or reasonable as well, and at half the price (if I remember correctly).But anyway, if you are hugely using your phone most of the time, and it is important for your life/work/family etc. Then you might as well choose your favourite tool, even if it is more expensive.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 07:16:09 pm
content: I really don't like things with microSD cards in myself. I spent years arguing with Android and windows phone handsets which had slow access, weird integration problems and general unreliability when using expansion cards. One of these events ate all of the content of my youngest's first birthday which was an unforgivable failure in my eyes. The storage in iOS is very well integrated and transparent to operation. One less thing to worry about. I look at my XR and I've used 36Gb of storage at the moment including cached netflix episodes which isn't a whole lot out of a 128Gb handset.The issue with non iOS devices is that the companies I work for are financial sector mostly and after years of problems with Android device management, malware and security issues, they are mostly "iOS only". So you have to meet them there to integrate. Also on top of that you're paying for the support and repair network with Apple which is far better than Samsung and Google etc who use independent generic repairer networks. Motorola was the worst experience I had on that front where my Moto developed an SD card fault (yeah that again). When I sent it in for repair in warranty it disappeared for two weeks. It came back with a £205 ransom for repair which was complete system board replacement because it was water damaged. The handset was waterproof. I suspect they had, and this was confirmed by various on line experiences, that they didn't want to repair it and they damaged it themselves.A £1000 iOS device is a £500-ish phone as well. But you're paying £229 extra for less hassle (integrated high speed storage, better integration, better quality control, much better longevity) and £179 (applecare) on top of that for premium service and support. And I don't mind that.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 07:27:08 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on March 14, 2020, 07:16:09 pmThat makes a lot of sense, you are convincing me!But £1,000 is still a powerful enough deterrent, that I won't be getting one, for real, at least not now.I'd better padlock my wallet, before reading your next post (joke).It's a bit like the £3.75 no-name branded simple multimeter, versus a £475 Fluke multimeter.If you are into electronics and use multimeters a lot, the Fluke makes a lot of sense, and is probably well worthwhile.But if you only want to check if a PP3 9V is still around 9V, once or twice per year. The £3.75 (cheap) multimeter, as long as you DON'T use it for mains voltage work. May be the ideal solution.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 07:32:56 pm
content: Haha yes. Exactly that. It's more a Brymen versus a Fluke TBH. The Brymen has an irritating as shit backlight but it does the jobOn the purchase side of things, I save up for a new one which is a rarity these days. When this phone is EOL I will buy the new one in cash.I am trying to persuade myself not to buy a Fluke 117 at the moment as a "second" DMM

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 07:33:50 pm
content: My 3 year old Nokia 5 does everything I need and more, and it was £110 on a special deal when I bought it. Actually, it is my first 'smart' phone!It may be a generation thing but almost everything seems ridiculously expensive these days. One of my other interests is motocycles and prices for those now are insane! I just refuse to spend £20K plus for a bike!! Especially when the cliff edge depreciation is taken into account. I let the fools with credit cards take all the damage then buy something 5 or more years old. I bought my first newish bike in years 2 years ago, a 2005 MV Agusta 750 Brutale, it's utterly mint, even by my OCD standards, less than 5k miles when I bought it, one owner, almost new tyres, full history, all the docs and keys. £4500. It was £15K new. It's AFAF and looks superb, a real joy to ride and even better in the knowledge that I own it outright and didn't murder my finances to buy it. The latest version is £30K plus!!!!!

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 07:52:46 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on March 14, 2020, 07:33:50 pmHopefully, buying used, is helping save the planet. As it means something is well made ONCE, then passed on to others, over a long time. Rather than everyone, buying their own, brand new ones, then binning it, after only a few years.Because lab (electronics) test equipment, is usually designed to last a long time, be repairable and of heavy duty, robust construction. They can make excellent, used purchases.Like with the big price savings you made, when buying the bike(s). Used for some things, can be really good.The decreasing quality and longevity levels, of many modern day goods/items. Is probably making them poor value USED, as well. I.e. most/all of their useful life is used up already.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 08:00:13 pm
content: Very true. Incidentally and combining two things, I buy my kids refurb phones from giffgaff:https://www.giffgaff.com/mobile-phones/refurbished/appleI haven't had any that aren't distinguishable from new yet! They don't get new ones because they can afford to do with the spare Nokia 5 (another topic merged!) for a few daysMost of my test gear until recently was as old as me

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 08:31:26 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on March 14, 2020, 08:00:13 pmI have at times, used Apple products. IOS does seem to be easier, more straight forward to use and more polished and nicer, than Android, in my experience.Android programs tend (in my experience), to be cheaper or even free, on Android. But again, that is not a deal breaker.If any of my test equipment, was older than me, it would take too long to reach steam pressure. Look nice (the Victorians were good at that), I'd need to keep a horse to power it. The springs would need winding, before using it. It would have 'valves' that need replacing (NO, not that kind of valve, the much older, mechanical ones).Also, by now, the Leyden Jar capacitors, would need refilling with liquid.EDIT: Obviously I'm joking about my age. EDIT2: Revised, and made shorter, more summarised.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 09:10:39 pm
content: Even test equipment suffers the modern blight though. If you look inside stuff from the 60's, 70's and even the 80's, the quality of construction, components and cabinet engineering is superb. Now it's all plastic click assembly and self tapping screw crap. Even high end gear now doesn't even approach that of the past for quality. Obviously functionality far exceeds anything from the classic era, but the new stuff has no substance. I get a sense of satisfaction when I'm tinkering with old valve stuff using an Avo, using even a Fluke on anything modern isn't the same.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 09:14:28 pm
content: PCs last longer than they ever used to because it's no longer necessary to upgrade every two years, to run the latest software, like it was 20 years ago. Even though upgrading didn't necessarily mean having to replace the entire computer, most people companies did back then.Cars might not be as repairable as they used to be but they now do more miles than they used to before completely breaking down, so I don't think it's as much of an issue as some people think. Newer cars are also more efficient, than older ones, so there comes a point when it's more environmentally friendly to replace the car, rather than keep it running.In the long run I think people should get used to using their cars less. New housing estates could be built with the car parks in land nearby. No garages, drives and no on street parking permitted. I don't see anything unreasonable about people having to walk the first and last half mile or so of the journey. It would definitely cut obesity rates and increase the health of the population, as well as being good for the environment.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 09:29:14 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on March 14, 2020, 09:10:39 pmYou're right, I agree. But there are all sorts of complicated trends, some of which maybe, are actually good.Because surface mount parts can be ridiculously tiny, I suspect that also means they use very little raw material (and energy to make them hopefully), which is good for the planet. And less stuff/bulk/weight to need recycling or ending up in landfill.Also, the modern methods of construction, can help stuff work at very high frequencies and have little input capacitance.E.g. If you consider a modern 1 GHz bandwidth oscilloscope. Then design it to be made like something from the 1960s/70s. Lots of separate PCBs, large over-sized through hole components. Assembled fully with screws, and individual (replaceable/repairable) sections. It could get very difficult to achieve the 1 GHz, considerably more expensive, and possibly use much more power from the mains.tl;drNot all the modern trends, are necessarily bad things.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 09:43:46 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on March 14, 2020, 09:14:28 pmThat's true. In the hay days of the PC revolution, many of us were upgrading or replacing our computers. Every 6, 12 months or more. If you didn't keep up, the next new windows would come out.E.g. Windows 3.1, Windows 98, Windows XP etc.You basically had to upgrade/replace your PC, or the latest new windows version, would either refuse or be unable to work on your 'old', bought 2 years ago machine. Or would work, but so slowly, you'd feel the need to upgrade, every time you used it.The trend in some games, also seemed to need ever more powerful PCs and especially graphics cards. For quite a long time.Quote from: Zero999 on March 14, 2020, 09:14:28 pmThat sounds like a house that I'd immediately cross off my shortlist, of homes to live in, very quickly.Although when/if self-driving cars, becomes commonplace. I'd just get my car, to pick me up, in the nearest place to where I live. Problem solved.You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.Do you think everyone would be happy and choose to buy houses from your housing estate ?

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 09:49:08 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on March 14, 2020, 09:14:28 pmIt's half way to freezing out, blowing gusts of 40mph and horizontal rain, and you need to go shopping or you won't have dinner. Yes, let's enjoy a half a mile walk to the car and back.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 10:43:23 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 14, 2020, 09:43:46 pmI agree, it wouldn't be popular, but often things which are for the general good are unpopular and if planning laws were changed, then you wouldn't have a choice.And self driving cars becoming widely legal is pure fantasy. Even if it becomes technically possible very soon, it doesn't mean it'll happen. Driverless trains have being technically possible for 30 years or so, yet 99% of the UK rail network relies on drivers. Legislation, insurance and what people feel comfortable with are very big obstacles.Quote from: Monkeh on March 14, 2020, 09:49:08 pmI wouldn't bother me. I have walked three miles to work in similar weather conditions before. Just wear a nice waterproof jacket and don't be such a wimp!And before people had cars, they had to walk a darn sight further every day to get food. It's what the human body is designed to do. People would be much healthier and even happier, in the long run, if they drove less and walked more.There are still a fewcar free placesaround the world and they seem to get along fine. The closest one to us is Sark, which seems like a nice place to live, although I've not been there myself. I don't see why we can't experiment with car free housing estates. They'd certainly be much safer, quieter and greener.However, I do agree with both of your points that what I'm proposing will never happen, because no government would agree to such an unpopular proposal. Indeed lots of the things in this thread regarding reduced consumption and higher prices won't be popular, even though they would be good for the planet.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 11:07:00 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on March 14, 2020, 10:43:23 pmWhen steam trains were first becoming available, some people thought they wouldn't be able to breath. if the train moves quickly.When cars were becoming a possibility on the roads. There was some kind of law, in the UK. Whereby, a man had to walk in front of the car, carrying a red flag. To enforce the 4 MPH speed limit, and warn people, that the car was coming.A long time ago, IBM (if I remember, correctly), said "There would only ever be a need for 4 or 5 computers, in the world".Margaret Thatcher, while she was an MP, a long time ago. Said edit: looked it up, "No woman in my time will be prime minister or foreign secretary - not the top jobs. Anyway, I wouldn't want to be prime minister. You have to give yourself 100% to the job." 1969". She was later to become the UK's first ever, women Prime Minister.I remember, a long time ago. Some people would say, "A computer, will never beat a human world Chess champion". In 1997, the Deep blue computer did just that Against Garry Kasparov.You might be right. But, I won't be surprised, if they don't start appearing on roads, sooner or later.Possibly only on high speed (at first), which exclude most other traffic, such as pedestrians and slower vehicles roads, called Motorways in the UK. (Autobahns/Interstate Highways).

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 11:09:52 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on March 14, 2020, 10:43:23 pmYes some of us do it for fun. I walked 10 miles last Saturday to buy some socks.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2020, 11:43:39 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 14, 2020, 11:07:00 pmYes, you're right. People have made all sorts or incorrect predictions about the future before and have later been proven wrong.Most of the things you've listed above were doubted because people didn't believe they were technically possible or lacked understanding of physics. I don't doubt for a second it's possible for a computer to drive a car much safer and more efficiently than a human. The reason why I'm so cynical about driverless cars is because there are other areas where automation is much simpler, trains for example, yet it hasn't happened for various reasons, which seem irrational. Insurance and litigation are the two things which stand out at the moment. What happens when your driverless car is involved in a fatal accident which is its fault? Who goes to prison? Tesla have only gotten away with it because they say the human driver should pay attention.Of course it might happen, but I'm doubtful it'll be in my lifetime. I wish I was wrong, because I don't like driving and think automation would make the road a safer place. The same way, I really wish they would fully automate the rail network because it would make trains much more reliable and cheaper.Quote from: bd139 on March 14, 2020, 11:09:52 pmI didn't do it for fun. I broke my thumb and had to walk to work every day for most of last year. The doctor told me not to cycle or even drive a car (I don't have one but considered hiring one) until it was properly healed, which never happened. I could have got a taxi but they're extortionate and I'm perfectly capable of walking that distance.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 12:06:39 am
content: Quote from: Zero999 on March 14, 2020, 11:43:39 pmGood point. But something like the railways, can get relatively slow/long time scales. Unlike general public cars, which might be changed every 3 years. The trains may only change in a big way, every 20 to 50 years (I don't know, what the time period is, exactly).Because they spend millions, buying the new train stock. Then keep using it for 10, 20, 30, 40 or more years. until it is replaced.I imagine, self driving cars, may start out in one small part of America. Maybe with the driver having to sit in the drivers seat and watch the precedings. If that works out. It could get rolled out in other parts of America, and other countries could start following suit.If not the US, then another country(s).As you said, Tesla, have already been rolling outautonomous self driving cars, sorry, I mean Tesla autopilot.As regards making the roads safer. Although computers won't drink and drive, take drugs or speed just for the fun of it. I still think that they will still have accidents. Just that those accidents will be different.E.g. The Tesla autopilots, have had various accidents. Because of misinterpreting things, etc.Another example is 'self driving'/autopilot jet airplanes. Which has been going on for a long time now. Where some percentage, maybe 99% of the time. the autopilot, effectively flies the plane.Because as you will know. We still have plenty of aircraft crashing, despite these systems.E.g. Boeing 737max, whose autopilot mode (although there is more to it, as it was not really the autopilots fault, the MCAS system and its sensors), was not exactly safe to leave it like that, unoccupied.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 12:11:26 am
content: Walking more and driving less is all very laudable but for many it just impractical. I live in the countryside and it's 1.5 miles to the nearest A road, and the road to reach that point has no footpath. It's then a further 7 miles to the nearest supermarket. So, assuming I would be willing to risk my life on a regular basis to go food shopping (the only physical shopping I ever do now), and further assuming I could maintain a brisk walking pace, it would take me about 2 hours each way, actually more, because on the return journey I would be carrying about 10 to 15 KG of shopping! I just don't have the time! And don't even mention buses, there are 3 per day in my area, 1 morning, 1 mid day, 1 evening!! And very often they are cancelled with no notice.This is the problem with all this drive less mantra, it's fine if you live in a city, but a non starter for those that live in areas with poor infrastructure. One thing that could be done to alleviate traffic congestion would be to change school starting times so they don't conflict with work hours.Then there is the question why?! Climate change, the climate is always changing, nothing we can do about it. Notice it is now called climate change, not man made climate change, funny that! Humanity is not affecting the climate in any significant way, it's all a scam.In 50 years when the whole scamming nonsense is eventually exposed there will be alot of very angry people!

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 12:37:27 am
content: Quote from: Zero999 on March 14, 2020, 11:43:39 pmSometimes the path to these things is tortuous. Automated trains have taken a long time to implement for a variety of reasons. One is the publicity associated with bad implementations. The TRAAM system at the Dallas-Ft. Worth American Airlines terminals in the 70s-80s is a horrible example. A simple low speed road train on a completely closed track (no pedestrian crossings, vehicles, or any similar hazards). And the control system was horrid. Jerky. Prone to stopping or speeding up for unfathomable reasons. And with some weird half-interval approach to the stations. Who would want more of that?But recently legal issues are pushing more automation in trains. Accidents which have at their source the operator paying attention to the cell phone or under the influence of drugs have resulted in trials where the question is asked "Are automated systems available?". "Well, yes." Followed by: "Could they have prevented this accident? and Why weren't they installed or in use?". Liability is resulting from the lack of automation.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 01:02:44 am
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on March 15, 2020, 12:37:27 amCopenhagen has a completely automated train system (Metro). Works very well.

author: TomS_
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 07:20:35 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 11, 2020, 04:56:08 amTyre pressure monitoring doesnt have to be done with active sensors in the wheels. It can also be done using existing sensors such as those used for ABS, although I have seen it done with some little doodad boxes that mount somewhere around the wheels.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 09:05:31 am
content: Quote from: TomS_ on March 15, 2020, 07:20:35 amI actually, looked quite extensively into it, some time ago.Some companies, such as Honda, with their Honda Accord. Have indeed used the wheel speed (ABS) sensors, to check that the tyre pressures are ok. But, unfortunately, it turns out that it has not been that easy or reliable (if I remember correctly), to use that method to check the tyre pressures and/or it was too much effort, as regards the software (I can't remember the details, but it wasn't good news).The complaints for some vehicles are that the batteries (in many cases, these are NOT replaceable) run out at around the 5 year mark. Some manufacture's, charge (from memory), £500 (or some big amount), to change all 4 tyre pressure sensors. Then in another 5 years time, the same thing will happen.Some people are furious, that they can't just change the batteries themselves, for a few pounds (e.g. if they took CR2032 etc). You can't just ignore it, because cars in the UK, over 3 years old, have to have annual safety checks (called MOTs), which check that many of the warning lights DON'T turn on (but do, when you cycle the ignition off/on).That's why I really like the idea of using (potentially maintenance free) ABS wheel speed sensors, but was disappointed, because it seems to be, being phased out.N.B. I haven't looked into this issue for a while, so maybe the situation has changed.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 09:41:57 am
content: Quote from: TomS_ on March 15, 2020, 07:20:35 amThe ones on my car use indirect TPMS ie by measuring relative axle rotation. It does go loopy every 500 or so miles and tell you that you have a flat tyre but it worked very quickly when I did have one. Not much to go wrong on that!

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 12:21:44 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on March 15, 2020, 09:41:57 amI have a car with indirect TPMS as well. One thing it doesn't work well with, is when all the wheels are low at the same time!

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 12:31:13 pm
content: That's a good point! I check mine anyway once a month. It's mostly supposed to identify outlying conditions.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 04:32:35 pm
content: Quote from: AndyC_772 on March 14, 2020, 03:38:43 pmI agree. I'd rather have a few more mm of thickness in return for 2 or 3 day battery life.Quote from: AndyC_772 on March 14, 2020, 03:38:43 pmUmm… for years (in the pre-smartphone days), cellphones all had removable batteries, but almost none were waterproofed, and drowned phones were commonplace. A battery compartment allows excellent water ingress to the innards of the phone, but no meaningful access to said drowned innards. (Your argument of opening the case — as in, unscrewing to get into the "no user serviceable parts inside" part of the device — is irrelevant to 99% of people, who have neither the skill nor tools to open small electronics. A waterproof phone is far better for a consumer than a non-waterproofed one that a technician can rescue. What's at issue is customer-facing battery compartments, and those add more water risk than they eliminate.) Remember, consumer electronics companies are designing their products for regular consumers, not for electronics technicians capable of doing water remediation and rework.Quote from: AndyC_772 on March 14, 2020, 03:38:43 pmLook at the battery connectors on those types of devices: they're gigantic. And the batteries are in gigantic rugged cases. None of that is compatible with a pocketable phone. And as I said, the other big thing about batteries is making it hard for people to get counterfeit or other low-quality aftermarket batteries. This has, at times, been a significant safety issue for camera makers, with aftermarket batteries catching fire and stuff. But people keep their phones on their body. If suddenly, a third of phones out there have questionable batteries inside, this would legitimately result in a LOT more injuries.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 10:15:40 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 15, 2020, 12:06:39 amAutomation was ready to take over from human train drivers over 30 years ago, so it should have already been done by now. I doubt it would need replacement of the entire locomotive and rolling stock. It should be possible to retrofit all the required sensors and control hardware to the existing trains.The problem is self driving cars it would have to be a universal roll-out, rather than a gradual upgrade. A computer will always be more cautious than a human and when people realise a driverless car will always give way to them, they'll take advantage of it. Yes, they will have different accidents to human drivers. I don't think people would take it very well if they were told their loved one wouldn't have been killed, had a real human being driving, irrespective of how many more lives being saved by automation, avoiding human error. At the movement, the law states the person behind the wheel is ultimately responsible and I can't see that changing soon.Driving a car as a couple of orders of magnitude more difficult than a train. It would be fairly simple to automate the entire rail network and there would be a huge return on the investment.As far aeroplanes are concerned: human pilots are still necessary. I honestly don't know whether it's possible to eliminate human pilots. It wouldn't surprise me if it is, but I think the planes would all have to surrender a lot of control to the nearest air traffic controller for it to work.Quote from: CatalinaWOW on March 15, 2020, 12:37:27 amI completely agree with your points about railroad automation, which should in theory eliminate all accidents except for those which are completely unavoidable, such as someone jumping in front of a train. The same can't be said about cars though, because they're much more complicated to automate, especially when there are human controlled vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists around.Quote from: unknownparticle on March 15, 2020, 12:11:26 amYou're only in that situation because most people own a car. It's highly likely there was a small shop within a mile of where you live many years ago, when few people had a cars.And what I was proposing was for new housing estates to be virtually carless, so it wouldn't apply to you. I also accept that this will probably never happen, as it would be very unpopular.As far as schools are concerned, it depends on where you live. In my area the state schools aren't much of a problem. It's the private schools which contribute to congestion, because they tend to have an extra week off every school term and the traffic is good when they're closed. I'd just make children walk and cycle to school more, like in the good old days.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 10:33:01 pm
content: It is possible to eliminate pilots now, and has been for at least 20 years. General practice is for pilots to take off, then the autopilot is activated after about 20 seconds, the plane then flies on autopilot until it is well into the glide path to landing. However, the autopilot could do the whole thing without problem. The biggest problem in civilian aviation today is pilot boredom and consequent fatigue, because they have nothing to do in flight, this causes human error. So, it's a psychlogical problem, would passengers feel safe if they knew the aircraft was being flown entirely by computer with no flight crew onboard? Even knowing that this would probably be safer than being flown by a human pilot, because, most aviation accidents are caused by pilot error. Quite a dilemma.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2020, 10:51:06 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on March 15, 2020, 10:33:01 pmI suppose pilotess planes would be easier than driverless cars because there aren't lots of human controlled vehicles in the air. I'd definitely feel safer with no humans in the loop.

author: Cubdriver
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 01:42:17 am
content: Quote from: Zero999 on March 15, 2020, 10:51:06 pm...right up until there's a near catastrophic mechanical or system failure...UAL flight 232:Qantas flight 72:Qantas flight 32:US Air flight 1549:...and others. I think I'd prefer to keep the meat popsicles up at the pointy end to deal with failures like these. They might not ALWAYS succeed, but they'll do better than a computer that's not programmed for such things, or that, in cases like QF72, actually CAUSED them. There's a whole lot more that can go wrong in a plane than a car, and cars don't normally fall out of the sky.My vote is to keep the humans IN the loop.-Pat

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 03:32:33 am
content: There is no question that humans can sometimes deal with cases that the computers can't currently handle. But we are nearing the point (or perhaps already past) where the failures that humans introduce to the system outnumber and out weigh the cases where the computer would fail. Even if you only count cases where it is indisputably pilot error instead of just a case of throwing the pilot under the bus.It really shouldn't be a situation where personal feelings or preference is the deciding factor. Just the facts, maam. Just the facts.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 04:44:19 am
content: Quote from: Zero999 on March 15, 2020, 10:51:06 pmLet's consider a hypothetical thought experiment.I park up, near where you live. Walk, the half-mile, from the nearest car park to where you live on the housing estate, in the blistering rain. Put a large amount of cash (spending money) through your letter box.You now fly out to America, using the tickets I also just put through you letter box. (Make it quick, UK flights stop on Tuesday, because of the virus).You now drive in a nice hired Tesla, using autopilot, on the high speed interstate road. We now talk on skype, so I can make sure your thumb has healed up nicely. While the car is driving in autonomous automatic driving mode (autopilot).On Skype, I now ask you a question ?"You are talking to me on skype, without using your hands on the steering wheel, or pressing the pedals. You are looking at the computer/skype screen and talking to me. Who is driving the car ?".

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 10:53:53 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 16, 2020, 04:44:19 amSounds like fun to me. I get horrible motion sickness if I'm a passenger in a car and still have to focus on the road, so wouldn't be look at the screen for too long. Of course it will be Tesla's software driving the car, but legally speaking, if it had an accident, it would be my head on the block. Indeed if the car wasn't roadworthy, say the tires were bald, I would still be held responsible, even if it was a hire car. Irrespective of what's technically possible or safest, this is how the law works and I doubt it will change soon.Fortunately my thumb, whilst still isn't 100% and probably never will be, is now good enough to drive.I think if I got free tickets to America and a large amount of spending money, I'd probably do something else than hire a Tesla, given the choice.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 11:19:45 am
content: Yeah

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 12:04:17 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on March 15, 2020, 12:31:13 pmI was six years a TPMS electronic developer for big German car company.TPMS is required by the law, law is required because people are stupid. Check every six month is a must, every two is good. Every month you really love your car.There are different ways to lose pressure in a tire:1) Temperature (about 0,1Bar/10°C) (only about this point I could talk for hours)2) Diffusion: no tire is perfect, air is leaking at slow rate (about 1Bar/Year)3) Altitude change (yes it could mess up things, another 30 minutes here)4) Tire is damaged5) .... not relevantTPMS is nice if you have run flat tires, so you will know for sure something is wrong in a tire. TPMS is also nice to save gas generally speaking. If people could realize how much gas/money is wasted because the tires are low...They all should use bicycles, very few bikers are using bike with low tires... People thinks cars get old and decrease naturally efficiency, they still do not understand tires lose air slowly --> low tires car are eating so much more gas is not even funny.Number one car fuel wasted reason world wide is low tires... oh wll let's make a law... oh well the TPMS of course should detect low tires even when all four are down to save gas --> active system with battery required by law.No normally you can't swap the (normally) potted battery, there is a time/energy counter anyway to prevent that "repair".PS: when in winters beginning the temperature was going down, you can't imagine how much phone calls I got because the light was on but the tires had no nails in it.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 12:47:21 pm
content: Quote from: Zucca on March 16, 2020, 12:04:17 pmThese reasons for TPMS are all good and noble, but surely some solution could be found that doesn't require replacing the entire module every few years at ridiculously "inflated" prices?All that will happen is that people end up making (and buying) "pretend TPMS modules" that just sit in the wheel well to keep the system happy and otherwise do nothing, in order to avoid the costs. E.g.https://www.reddit.com/r/electronics/comments/afa7yp/i_made_a_tpms_spoofer_for_my_car/

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 01:04:47 pm
content: I am with you Solder, I did not wanted an active TPMS in my car....and yes I hope somebody will "hack" them, I even know how to..... but I can't because I do not want to lose my job.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 01:25:43 pm
content: Quote from: Zucca on March 16, 2020, 01:04:47 pmThe real problem is - how to get power to the TPMS module inside a rotating wheel...Even something as simple as building a battery compartment into the rim, so the battery becomes user replaceable, would be much more acceptable than the disposable solution used now.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 01:48:05 pm
content: Quote from: SilverSolder on March 16, 2020, 01:25:43 pmYes but it will never complies with the automotive requirement (vibration, humidity, temp range)... or the costs will go up in the sky.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 03:22:26 pm
content: Quote from: Zucca on March 16, 2020, 01:48:05 pmI suspect there are lots of ways, of doing the TPMS, with a system that lasts the "lifetime of the car", and doesn't cost too much. Possibly with slight changes to the regulations, to allow the new system.Examples:Getting the power consumption down (tiny, ultra short burst radio signal, hence very low power consumption) considerably and/or a long life in years, battery and/or using ABS speed sensors and fixing the problems/issues with that system and/or building some kind of tiny generators, and super capacitors, a bit like some hand powered torches. Maybe MEMS (it allows lots of things to be done, which can solve some problems) can be used to fix the life expectancy problem.Maybe there are other, even lower power consumption, methods of communicating. E.g. IR Leds (if they can be optically guided, outside of where the pressure sensors are), and detecting it using the pre-existing cameras, fitted to cars these days.Maybe the ABS speed sensor system, could watch/model the air pressure changes, as the tyres warm up (outside temp is known, acceleration/braking is known), to detect/solve the issues with it.Maybe make it so that, at least trained garage mechanics, can change some form of small, built in battery. That would then at least be a lot cheaper. I.e. Some kind of CR2032 or special battery, well screwed, inside the sensors housing. But changeable by a trained (for this), car mechanic, in a few minutes (with the right tools).A bit like a watch battery case, where you need to remove some tiny screws or use a special tool, to get the watch apart, and change its battery.Then it would be more like a £100 fix every 5 years, rather than a £500 fix, because of the new parts which are needed.Maybe pot just the battery and a suitably reliable connector. So that a much cheaper replacement can be used. I.e. a battery pack (already vibration resistant and suitable for the temperature range), rather than the entire unit.Alternatively, get the costs of the unit down and sell it cheaply and/or allow it to be a standardised part. Hence it can be made/sold, at a much lower price. A bit like you can buy standard bulbs for your car (older, as they tend to be LEDs, these days).But, I agree, it is NOT easy. There are technical issues to be solved.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 03:42:36 pm
content: All good ideas, but none of then will survive the industrialization process. DIY solution could be a hope, so when it stops working you know how to fix it.that said the sensors are not very easy accessible, you need this machine in your garage:In some cases the best sensors is having no sensor at all.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 04:12:55 pm
content: Quote from: Zucca on March 16, 2020, 03:42:36 pmWhen the regulations (law), were created. They should have kept within an affordable budget, so that a reasonably large number of people, can have their own cars.If you allow uncontrolled, feature creep, and other increasing in excessive regulation (Red Tape). Then the purchasing and running costs of cars, can spiral out of control. You have to be practical.Yes, for £100,000,000 per car. You could surround it with 50 outside air bags (to save pedestrians), wrap it in cotton wool (in case a bird accidentally hits it). Limit its top speed to 10 MPH, to limit injuries when an accident occurs.Make it out of 100% recycled materials.To save the planet, it is powered by a clockwork spring. You have to wind it up for 250 hours, before moving/driving each 10 feet.It has to have a full intensive care hospital unit built in, plus an AI Doctor, to save anyone in an accident.Etc etc.The people who create laws and regulations, should be practical, rather than being extremely OCD, and putting in very expensive regulations, even if it only saves 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 people per year.Tyre pressures, are important for the safety of the car. But, such regulations should NOT be overly burdensome, so that they end up considerably increasing the maintenance costs of cars.tl;drThe laws/regulations, should be a sensible balance between, rules for safety/improvement, and the practical costs for buying and maintaining a car, in the long term.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 04:27:08 pm
content: Pretty sure that my Mazda 6 has replacable batteries in it's TPMS units? Anyway, recently the system had a problem, the rear tyres only were losing air quite rapidly, to the point where the dashboard indicator would light up every other week or so, annoying. So I had to re-inflate the guilty tyres accordingly. This got old quickly but I was not enjoying the prospect of being bent over for some unpleasant rear end attention by a garage. Tyres are one of those things that are not on the DIY car maintenance agenda. However, through a little research I discovered that it was most likely to be the inflator valve stem assembly that was likely to be the cause. After some ebay surfing I found some aftermarket units at a very low price, and as I coincidently needed some new rear tyres I decided to buy them and ask the tyre fitting service to replace them at the same time. Result, problem solved!I do like TPMS though, as it saves one of those annoying car tasks, and when I set off on a journey I can be conveniently confident the tyres are ok.And correct tyre pressures defo save ALOT of fuel.I wish my motorcycle also had it, as tyres on a bike are a life and death issue.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 04:30:37 pm
content: I'm all for TPMS as well.But create a set of regulations, which allow efficiently priced solutions. Such as using existing ABS wheel speed sensors/systems and/or battery replaceable units or something else, which potentially lasts the life of the vehicle.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 04:44:43 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 16, 2020, 04:12:55 pmTotally agree.Another similar issue is with HID headlights. My car recently failed it's MOT because the headlamp washing system was inoperative. I didn't even realise it had headlamp washers, although it does have active, HID headlights. So, I discovered that it does, and a fuse had blown. There was no indication on the dash that it had a fault, helpful................. not. Then I found there was a law, introduced in 2005 from memory, that required cars with HID headlights to fitted with a washing system.However, it does not specify how effective it has to be!! After replacing the fuse the system works fine as far as spraying high'ish pressure jets of fluid from the screen washer tank at the headlights for about 1.5 seconds, every 20th operation of the screen washers!!! It has naff all effect on the clarity of the headlamp lenses, which stay pretty clean anyway due to the aerodynamic design!!I had a Merc back in the early 90's which had actual headlamp wipers, with a seperate reservoir for that system only, that worked very well, as would be obvious. Although it did have one quite significant design problem, it froze up in winter and there was no protection for the wiper motors or washer spray motor for stalled motor overload. Sometimes the wiper motor fuse blew but not everytime they froze, so in the end they burned out!So, going back to the HID headlamp thing, we have a useless system that is mandatory by law but doesn't actually work in practice. So the consumer pays the price for the incompetance of beurocrats!

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 04:50:24 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 16, 2020, 04:30:37 pmWhen have you ever known government regs to be well thought out?!There is an old piece of car safety advice, said to be very effective and very cost efficient. Place a rigid 6" long steel spike in the centre of car steering wheels and remove seatbelts, then every one would be very careful how they drove!

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 05:04:18 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on March 15, 2020, 10:33:01 pmNot even close to a dilemma.Look at the crash stats for military drones: they’re terrible compared to commercial aviation. (Twice a month according tohere. And there are vastly fewer drones than commercial aircraft. Consider that there are 1200 Boeing 737sin the sky at any given moment!And then consider how many other models of planes are in use, cumulatively outnumbering the 737.) We are nowhere close to ready to have pilotless passenger aircraft.What people don’t understand is that “autopilot” isn’t a Google Maps that can control the flight and react dynamically to situations. “Autopilot” is a broad collection of different automatic settings that are enabled selectively. Think cruise control, but for various settings, not just speed. Yes, you can program in a flight path, but again, it must be programmed.Please, stop promulgating the myth that planes fly themselves. They don’t. I mean, they do, if you consider ONLY the act of keeping the aircraft aloft under non-special circumstances. But pilots do far more than that. Even if you moved those tasks out of the cockpit and into a control room on the ground, those tasks do not go away, and doing them remotely is far less effective.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 05:06:59 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on March 16, 2020, 03:32:33 amThe number of crashes today is already minuscule. Yes, they’re now mostly “due to human error”, but this doesn’t tell you ANYTHING about the number of incidents pilots were able to resolve without incident, but which a computer would not have been able to resolve. I think those are FAR more numerous than you think.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 06:13:58 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on March 16, 2020, 04:50:24 pmThe intentions and concepts are good. They just seem to get carried away, and end up with crazy levels of feature creep. Hence resulting in what at least some others, think are overly onerous regulations!Analogy: Someone here, just needs a £20, used analogue crt Oscilloscope. For general hobby work.They then start a thread somewhere, saying, don't worry about budget, what scope should I get.Then someone says, you should get at least 100 MHz bandwidth.Then someone else (also without checking your usage, which is only for audio work, to a maximum of 20 KHz), Hence 500 MHz bandwidth, hence someone insists digital are better.Then someone says you should get isolated inputs.4 Input channels (just in case).Future proof it and get a 2 GHz bandwidth model.Etc etc.The £20 used model, has to now be a £75,000 oscilloscope, which ends up being taken out of its box twice. Once for checking an AA battery is 1.5V, the other time is for a 2 KHz signal.Yes, by all means, get a scope. But a £300 digital Rigol/Siglent etc. Not a super expensive one.But it would apply to whatever someone wants to buy or achieve.China (less so India/Others), are apparently doing very well, financially, and selling tons of stuff round the world. Yet, as regards western rules and regulations. They seem to have much less.These rules and regulations, could price the West out of too many markets.Quality and safety are good, but is the price too high ?tl;drMake things of reasonable/good quality and safe, but DON'T go overboard.Specify a Toyota/Ford/Hyundai type of regulation, NOT a Rolls Royce/Lexus/Top Mercedes S class/BMW/Ferrari etc'Good enough', not 'Gold plated, excessive opulence'.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 06:33:14 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on March 16, 2020, 04:50:24 pmI don't like DISAGREEING with people. But, I heard/read some research about it, and they discovered that is a completely nonsensical method. All you really need to do is check the nut that holds the steering wheel on, is tight.Because extensive research discovered, that almost all accidents, are caused by the NUT, between the steering wheel, and the drivers seat.Or, in other words (via internet search) 'A car's weakest part is the nut holding the steering wheel'.

author: Cubdriver
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 07:10:15 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on March 16, 2020, 03:32:33 amIt's not always the computer that fails. It's often something else. An unusual engine failure. A totally unforeseen weather incident. Fuel contamination.You can't program a computer for all the things that can go wrong - there are just too many possibilities. Some are caused by humans, but it's not always the humans on the plane. Very few crashes are caused by the pilots.-Pat

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 07:31:24 pm
content: Quote from: Cubdriver on March 16, 2020, 07:10:15 pmThat is very true!That is why a real human pilot, is reassuring and useful, in emergencies.Quote from: Cubdriver on March 16, 2020, 07:10:15 pmI could be misunderstanding your post. I couldn't easily find a link, which detailed ONLY the mistakes the pilots made (Pilot Error), rather than also including all human error.By vary few, do you mean 80% (Pilots + other humans making errors) ?Quotehttps://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_2_07/article_03_2.html

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 07:56:31 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on March 15, 2020, 09:41:57 amI have a vehicle that has the TPMS. A new sensor cost me about $80. I've had to replace two of them so far. Installation was free since I waiting until the tires had to be replaced. If I lived in a state that had mandatory inspection then I would have had to have also paid to have the tire removed and installed (if they will even let you do that now) before it would pass inspection. My TPMS only gives you a Go-No Go indication and not the actual tire pressure. I've also found that on long trips, if it rains it will cause the system to indicate that it has a system failure. No one has any idea why. The circuits for the TPMS are built into the same CPU board that controls MOST of the electronic functions in the vehicle and it costs multi thousands of dollars to replace it. IMO these systems are of LITTLE practical use and as always, the politicians mandated them with no concern of what it would cost consumers. At the very least major functions such as the TPMS needs to be built on it's own board so that it can be accessed without taking the entire vehicle apart and it can be troubleshoot and replaced is necessary without having to replace thousands of dollars worth of other circuits.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 08:12:25 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on March 16, 2020, 07:56:31 pmTPMS is a good idea and solves a real problem - it just doesn't seem to be "done right" yet.

author: Cubdriver
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 08:42:23 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on March 16, 2020, 07:31:24 pmI guess I'm thinking more along the lines of FATAL crashes.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airlines-safety/major-commercial-plane-crash-deaths-worldwide-fell-by-more-than-50-in-2019-group-idUSKBN1Z0242(86 accidents, with 8 of them fatals.)Let me change tack a little - do you think an on-board computer system could have gotten the passenger planes in the incidents in the videos I've linked to in earlier replies down as safely and with as little loss of life as the pilots involved did? Remember - those were not caused by pilot error, but by other, external things. They were failures that could easily have caused the planes to crash with NO survivors, and potentially a lot of collateral damage and death on the ground when they hit - New York City, for instance, and only creative thinking on the spot and very skilled hands and minds prevented that. Think someone could program a computer to do what Captain Sullenberger did in getting the Airbus glider down into the Hudson River? The Qantas A380 pilots with the grenaded engine that took out many of the computer's sensors? Or Al Haynes in Sioux City? The latter crew were literally making things up as they went along, as the scenario they found themselves in had never been thought possible so no procedures had been developed for it.Could a computer handle routine stuff? Yeah, at this point, it probably could. It's when stuff goes off into the weeds that the pilots earn their money, and are worth every penny they make and more.I still want a human brain up front. Certainly those flying for the major carriers have excellent safety records.-Pat

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 08:49:52 pm
content: Quote from: SilverSolder on March 16, 2020, 08:12:25 pmTPMS is just one more system that allows lazy ignorant people to ignore basic maintenance. Those never end well, the more you cover up for stupidity and laziness, the more stupid and lazy people become.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 08:56:43 pm
content: Quote from: Cubdriver on March 16, 2020, 08:42:23 pmI've tidied up my original post, to make it clearer.I didn't look at the videos, because I've already seen many videos like that, and am well aware, that pilots have often done an amazing job.I completely agree with you. Pilots, have often done an amazing job, at saving aircraft. Which have been badly damaged, by all sorts of things, such as an engine mechanical failure, causing it to catch on fire and stop working.I need to differentiate between, pilots who do amazing work, saving aircraft, that have got into difficulties for an amazingly wide range of reasons, and pure Pilot Error, causing the aircraft to crash, in the first place.Things like pilots who let their children take control, the plane then unfortunately crashed (Russian).Pilots who run out of fuel (their human error, e.g. mixed up between Gallons and ibs or Kilograms etc, putting the wrong amount of fuel into the plane).Pilots who are drunk or fall asleep.Pilots who, due to the mechanical failure on the left hand engine, accidentally (human error), switch off the working right hand engine.It's tricky. On the one hand pilots can be very useful in an emergency. But on the other hand, pilot error, sometimes leads to tragedy. Sadly, you can't have one, without the other.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 10:28:28 pm
content: Enjoy the discussion,I even saw a system based on RFID so trigger impulse on LF and respond on HF.It is possible to get enough energy to send the pressure values with a piezo in the tires.The problem was to get all the tires OEM to agree to stick that sensor on the surface and to guarantee it will not fall down on with all the rubber compound.Also the tire change situation would be a mess for our customers, they must only buy tires compatible with the sensor on it.I even saw tires with a pocket to hold the sensors in place, but everytime somebody asked:"what if the nail pierce the sensors?"I had so many nice ideas, but all of them were crushed in the industrialization process. Frustrating.that's why a not run flat tires, with indirect TPMS and some regular pressure check interval is the best of the best.PS: I do not know in UK, but the gas stations in USA are absolutely the worst to get tires correctly inflated.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 10:46:40 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on March 16, 2020, 08:49:52 pmDo you feel the same about oil pressure warning lights, temperature gauges, etc.? - Personally, I find the tire pressure information useful... if I could have the tire pressures displayed on the dash, I'd take it... as long as it doesn't add a $100 per year running cost!

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 10:50:46 pm
content: Quote from: Zucca on March 16, 2020, 10:28:28 pmWhy not have a piezo with a small weight attached, sitting in the rim itself? Vibrations would charge a supercap or something... Putting them in the tire seems a potentially bad idea for all the reasons you gave, and then some.Gas station tire pressure: you should have a gauge with you in the car, that way any gas station will work fine!

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2020, 11:57:46 pm
content: Quote from: Zucca on March 16, 2020, 10:28:28 pmI understand. There are all sorts of real life practicalities, which stop all sorts of clever ideas. Being implemented on cars.It must be an extremely tough environment, being inside a car tyre. I dread to think of the vibrations/shocks/temperatures/pressures/contamination/chemicals/etc.You then have to meet so many, sometimes contradictory requirements.You have limited or very little influence/control/detailed-information on anything, outside of the device you are actually designing/supplying.Whatever you do, has to be approved by the customer, who may say no, and/or give you various requirements.The parts you ideally want, may be too expensive/unreliable or unavailable in the desired timescales.You have to listen to all the current and upcoming regulations.Other team members or bosses, may disagree or not allow, the proposed method/solution.Then there are budget limits and cost targets and stuff.It might simply be that it is a good idea/method, but would take too long to develop and/or be too risky (of it not working or being accurate/reliable enough).