Sure it would –it just wouldn't last 20 years. With charging in a few minutes, I think he's perfectly capable of charging it while he's working. So that's 2 charges a day, or one every 12 hours. That means it'll last 13.7 years. To be honest, that's a pretty reasonable length of time for a car.

Are you claiming you drive more than 274 miles average every single day for 20 years running?

That's true in low speed impacts, especially ones where your head is otherwise protected. It's not at all true in accidents where a lot of energy is involved. When you're talking about 50g deceleration, the most important thing is to make sure that the head doesn't accelerate rapidly away from the spinal column. That's why Formula 1 drivers wear a HANS (Head And Neck Support) device - to stop the head pulling forward off the spine in a crash. The brace position does a similar thing.

Actually, no, surprisingly. Not only is your likelihood of being in a plane crash lower than that when driving, but... Even if you assume you're doing to be in a plane (or car) crash, your chance of surviving are actually higher in a plane. 75% of people involved in a plane crash survive. Meanwhile, only 50% of people involved in a car crash survive.

That seems pretty reasonable if you're talking about a car with a decent range. It may even be overkill.

Actually, this is the one important bit of the safety briefing. It's been shown multiple times that in an emergency situation we're surprisingly shit at figuring out where we should be going. Not only that, but one person trying to fight the flow and go to the wrong exit can fuck over many many other people. Just prompting people to look around and register in their brain "it's 3 rows behind me" is useful.

Not true, as multiple actual scientific studies, and, more popularly myth busters have shown. Assuming the brace position significantly reduces the acceleration your head undergoes, and hence significantly reduces the chances of traumatic brain injury.

Actually, the brace position does have a huge effect on your survival of a crash landing. It stops your head accelerating rapidly forward, and then backward relative to your body. That illiminates a whole huge class of possible brain injuries.

Don't argue the "ignore the flight safety briefing" point - that's a red herring.

They're not saying "it's unsafe" therefor we shouldn't have it. They're arguing "we don't like it very much, so we're going to tell you about safety so that you think we have a point".

So... removes it.

Yes, damn them for that. Yes, damn them for being so self centred, biggotted and idiotic for believing that somehow people who were born in another country are not worthy of being around them.

I'm sorry, but what the hell? You literally just claimed that depriving them of something (in this case the ability to live around you) is not depriving them of something.

I didn't say he didn't have the right to speak. I was just framing his comments with a bit more context.

Having the right to speak is not the same as having the right to not be called an idiot.

Context - what's actually on the rise in Scandinavia at the moment is Nazism. So far, the fight against it has been a rather ham-fisted attempt to suppress it in the news, rather than engaging it and letting people see for themselves what it is. OP apparently sympathises with the rise of the far right in his country.

That would be because a modern F1 car is subject to significantly tighter rules than a 2-3 year old F1 car. The RedBull RB6 was measured to peak at 5.8g lateral acceleration.

G-suits are designed to push blood out of the legs, and to the brain. F1 cars almost never (and never when they're working right) accelerate in a direction where that's useful. G-suits do almost nothing useful against lateral and longitudinal acceleration. Only vertical.