• CheetahHybrid @pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Sure it’s dangerous, but so is that giant tank of fuel that’s in the car. I think we figured out pressure vessels pretty well

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Fuel is necessary to the function of the engine. If cars didn’t need it, they wouldn’t have it. We’ve figured out C4 pretty well, but we don’t stuff the doors full of it.

      These thrusters could maybe help you if you fell down a particularly short cliff. Otherwise, if you get in an accident severe enough to send you rolling, you do not want high pressure nitrogen tanks right next to your head.

    • xthexder@l.sw0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      A fuel tank is not a pressure vessel (apart from being sealed to keep fumes in). If you get a puncture in your gas tank, it doesn’t immediately and violently explode, it just leaks fuel out. Even if it does catch fire, it would not be as violent an explosion as a pressure vessel failure. In most scenarios it would burn, but not explode.

      • BruisedMoose@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Sorry, but as someone who has seen at LEAST 3 movies in his lifetime, I can say with absolute certainty that just about anything will cause a car to explode.

      • CheetahHybrid @pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I know the gas tank is not a pressure vessel, I made two separate statements.

        My point is that we already do dangerous things. I don’t think it’s a huge jump to put a pressurized nitrogen tank in a car. Car manufacturers even tried putting hydrogen tanks in cars. It’s possible to make it safe.