Originally Posted by jaco
How did they calculate the probability of an eagle strike? What precision! They lost my interest at that ridiculous number.
That's where they gained my interest. I accept that a number quoted to so many decimal places is redolent more of 'truthiness' than accuracy, but it does hint at a calculation based on evidence
and not on assertions. The derivation of that calculation I would like to see.
It would also have helped to have had the post split into paragraphs rather than as a huge lump of text; paragraphs make for comprehension of each point made and enhance the reader's ability to weigh up each point within the context of the message, which was certainly heartfelt. The immediate impression I gain when faced with huge lumps of text is: "Stream-of-consciouness-alert! Avoid!"
However, this post was an exception, and was well worth the struggle.
As someone who in the now-distant past had much direct involvement with reducing birdstrike hazards in the Royal Air Force, I'm all in favour of approaching this kind of problem from an evidence-based point of view!