281–290 of 376 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cool example of vortices on an F1 car as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlDnd3B1rhs
That looks like lens flare to my untrained eye. I would never have thought that was smoke in a vortex.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know about that. I think mostly it has to do with having the power to pick and choose critical service providers, bully them, etc. If Michael Jackson and Steve Jobs had not been as wealthy and powerful as they had been, they would also both probably be alive. Neither has much to do with being risk-takers, although you might be right that a higher arousal threshold desensitized them to risk. It may also be tha…
> ... Steve Jobs had not been as wealthy and powerful as they had been, they would also both probably be alive. Steve Jobs got pancreatic cancer, IIRC. Which has a pretty low survival rate, per wikipedia 5% after 5 years from initial diagnosis. So most likely he'd be dead by now no matter what he would have done.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/02/1...
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/articles/2013/02/07/ash...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd be interested to see in this thread, who here has actually studied aeronautical engineering I studied Aerospace Engineering (PhD in Aerodynamics), and I stay out of internet conversations over "how" lift is generated. For me it is one of those topics that is just not worth debating. It seems that people get _really_ attached to their personally preferred theory of lift.
Can you point to a source for those of us who want to know the right answer (like, sailors)?
http://ljjensen.net/Maritimt/A%20Review%20of%20Modern%20Sail...
> It's an incredible feeling, > lots of fun > Yes, it can be dangerous, > but it's a risk you can > manage yourself Try meth!
This comment thread quickly deteriorated from civil discussion to absurdist comparisons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course, general aviation is much more dangerous. As a general rule, the smaller the plane, the riskier it is, partially due to the corresponding increase in regulatory scrutiny as the size of the aircraft grows. Private pilots need a minimum of ~50 hours for their license. Most newly-hired jet pilots, private and commercial, have at least 1500 hours, and many have more than that.
Larger airplanes are also much more capable (better instruments, things like anti-icing systems, ability to fly above weather), far better maintained on average, fly into better airports, have better flight planning resources, and more. Note that when looking at airline safety, you'll get misleading numbers if you go back too far. Safety has improved remarkably in the past couple of decades. In the 80s and 90s, a cou…
Those little jets man... they're fine most of the time but what a spooky experience that was.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Technically, the lowest flight level is FL200 or 20000'. Below that, altitudes are reported in feet. I'm not really familiar with the "angels" thing. I suspect that is specifically military. EDIT: there was a reply (since deleted) that indicated I may not be completely correct on stating FL200 as the lowest number used. I contend that I am still basically correct for North America, but there is some subtlety: https:/…
Could you clarify why you cite 20,000ft as the transition altitude? I've always been under the impression it is FL180. From your wiki link: > In the United States and Canada, the transition altitude is 18,000 ft.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I was in single digits, my mother and I were coming home from an international flight and the plane was struck by lightning. We lost a bit of altitude (felt like a TON of altitude subjectively), and yeah... it was a damned good thing we'd all been told to keep those seatbelts on. It was literally the difference between seconds of terror, and someone being seriously injured.
Using that philosophy, then anyone riding a bicycle, even if they aren't going at high-speed on road, should wear a helmet "just in case" there is an accident to protect their skull? There is a balance between annoyance and utility. I personally have no problem wearing a belt for the entire flight, including while sleeping. But I'm not to dismayed by those who leave it off, walk around the cabin, go hang out near the…
Speed only makes a difference if your head hits something whilst moving at that speed. Or you can just fall off at a walking pace, and the acceleration between the top of your head to the ground is enough to kill you. Happened to a guy on the local trail a few years ago, as happens elsewhere as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And as I have mentioned elsewhere on here - I have flown inverted a few times, and to do so take a tremendous amount of forward pressure on the control stick to even try and attempt to hold altitude while inverted, in order to counteract the wings natural (slight) positive AoA and the tendency for the wing to move towards it upper surface. In fact, most of the aircraft I have flown would not be able to sustain invert…
> I'd be interested to see in this thread, who here has actually studied aeronautical engineering I studied Aerospace Engineering (PhD in Aerodynamics), and I stay out of internet conversations over "how" lift is generated. For me it is one of those topics that is just not worth debating. It seems that people get _really_ attached to their personally preferred theory of lift.
"Wings generate lift by changing the velocity of the flow around them" seems general and correct but the why part is pretty tricky without notions of continuity and conservation laws. And vorticity helps a lot, too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think we've reached that point at which I'd be happy to buckle my seatbelt and let you walk around the cabin to your heart's content. I am not your parent.
When I sit in the same cabin, and I'm buckled up, the previous poster (or his body parts) will be bouncing all over the seats of the same cabin, which is a danger to me. So I still prefer that he also buckles up.