SomeoneSomewhere

Point 3 is basically saying that, even with all due care and attention, people still make mistakes and people see still hurt or die because of those mistakes, or because of dumb luck.

Again, getting better, definitely not eliminated.

Sometimes, after considering all the factors, the best option is still basically to do nothing. Toddlers and cats will both throw tantrums to try to get something they shouldn't have, and there may not be an effective substitute for them.

There are jobs that are both necessary and fundamentally carry severe risk. We've gotten a lot better over the last few centuries, but fire rescue is still the first one that comes to mind.

While I agree in principle, there are a few things that complicate this:

• More caring/responsibility is required than one person can possibly handle. So instead, it is more about delegating and monitoring and only intervening in cases where the system failed. Attempting to fix everything personally will result in burnout. Attempting to fix everything could result in institutional burnout/insolvency.

• Not everyone is a reliable witness: consider the cat that claims to be absolutely starving and hasn't been fed in weeks. Sometimes people need to be refused what they want for the good of themselves, others, or the system as a whole.

• Human error exists and will screw up the best laid plans.

This does not mean that a particular system is or is not functioning well - but 'maternal care' and 'spoiled rotten' are not the same thing.

You can but the track has to be built for it. Japan has stations that are passed at 320km/h (200mph). You need minimum four tracks (two platforms, two passing) and curves/gradients suitable for the speed, along with noise mitigations as necessary.

If you're trying to re-use tracks and stations built in the 1800s that's possibly less feasible.

Part of handling that is having both local and limited-stop services (which they likely already do) and a good local/commuter train network.

But is it Travis she's getting married to!?!?!?!?

OR IS IT A GIRL!?!?!?!?

/s

Eh, Imperial Japan sure had a good crack at Euro-style colonialism, even if they started a bit late.

If you're not going after your neighbours (or your neighbours' neighbours, once you conquer your neighbours), then you need a blue-water navy and preferably gunboats. And that's mostly a European thing, though you've got a bit of Qing Dynasty, Japan, and some chicken/egg questions over building the boats vs colonising.

There's a big pile over on /r/AskHistorians: https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1aot4nr/why_is_the_term_colonialism_largely_not_applied/

Commercial planes often take off in mild tailwinds; they're typically certified for 10-15kt of tailwind. It's sometimes easier for the airport than re-sequencing all the flights especially if it's only a mild tailwind.

Florence has hills to one side (the west?) that mean taking off in that direction also carries a performance penalty because you need good engine-out climb rates. So it can be a choice of tailwind or hills.

It's all statistics. If you're never getting surprised by the weather, you are probably leaving money on the table. If it's happening all the time, you're selling too many seats.

It will also depend on how far out the last seat was sold.

I don't think there's much if any airfreight going through LCA. Both Florence and LCA are very short constrained runways, near much larger airports where you can more easily deal with freight.

Usually freight gets offloaded first, but then you're looking at passengers and bags. Or an enroute fuel stop somewhere with a longer runway.

It's often not just the heat, but also wind direction both at the airport and enroute. They probably plan for some combination of the three, but not worse case on all at once.

Headwinds on takeoff mean you can takeoff with more mass. Tailwinds, crosswinds, and higher temperatures mean you can carry less mass.

Tailwinds enroute mean you get a higher groundspeed for a given airspeed and arrive earlier, having burnt less fuel. If the tailwinds are known before departure, you can carry less fuel (less mass) and thus more payload (passengers).

There is nothing you can do to 'prepare' other than sell fewer tickets (and thus leave the flight unnecessarily empty on days when there isn't adverse weather) or use a bigger plane that still needs to be lightly loaded.

And NZ Post.