Is this an example of why mainstream media is useless?

Question

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080716/ap_on_go_ot/air_safety_fuel_tanks

This article tells us absolutely nothing. Did the need to get it out first cause this useless article to be published, or is it that our journalists are just poorly educated?

Answer 1

Herfinator is correct.  

You have missed the point of this article on airline safety.

As reported in the Associated Press article:  

Matt Ziemkiewicz of Rutherford, N.J, whose sister was a flight attendant aboard TWA Flight 800, said he was "disappointed this didn't happen sooner ... We knew this was a preventable accident before Flight 800."

The U.S. Air Force has used nitrogen replacement for decades.  The airlines have not, perhaps due to the cost of the nitrogen.  

As Ziemkiewicz says, this accident was preventable.  This is one of those follow-the-money stories which journalists should report.

Fuel tank oxygen replacement was developed by the Russians during World War II, and first use on USAF B-47s in 1950.  Nitrogen inerting systems were introduced during the Vietnam War in the late 1960s.  

Liquid nitrogen is used on C-5A military transports and halon gas (which depletes ozone) is used on the F-16 and F-117 aircraft.

I do not understand how you can mount an argument that the mainstream media is useless for reporting on aviation safety directives which might make air travel safer for the public.

Hope this answer helps you.

Answer 2

It's just a feed of something that is yet to happen.

Relax.....

But I agree most of the "news" out there is just useless information.

Answer 3

No no no -- this is really a very good article.  In-depth, well written, clearly researched, and all that.

It's for the consumer.  Now we know why it costs so freakin' much to go somewhere over 200 miles away.  Besides, since gas costs so much, I'm glad I know they're taking steps to protect their investment.