In my experience with my two three wheeled go-karts, having the single wheel at the back is much more stable. I’ve never worked out exactly why that’s the case though.
I know it a pipe dream, but I’ve been hoping we’ll all switch to diesels. JetA is so much cheaper. That being said I think probably ethanol will replace 100LL. It’s got a sufficient octane rating and the modifications needed to the engine and aircraft are pretty minor.
No it isn’t. The antenna is basically just a flashing light bulb for 5 GHz. 5 GHz transfers way less energy into your body than visible or infrared light because it’s not absorbed as readily and each photon has less energy. It’s like the difference between a blue lightbulb and a red lightbulb.
It’s supposed to be a Eurocentric era: it happened in Europe. You wouldn’t talk about Charles Martel or Pepin the short living in the era of the Tang Dynasty just as much as you wouldn’t talk about Tang Gaozu living in the Dark Ages.
Could be that they didn’t use arsenic based pesticides as much or if they did environmental factors/farming techniques removed the ability for the plants to uptake the arsenic. They might also just have less naturally occurring arsenic in their soil.
Because most people aren’t car people and buy it to brag to their friends or so. It’s more important that they look cool.
Also, to be fair, it’s not a big deal to remove the engine and it makes a lot of work much easier.
That’s more because of how old the fleet is. Modern engines with fuel injection, electronic ignition, turbos, and (optional) constant speed props don’t really care as long as their ECU has a map for it.
Under normal circumstances a plane can totally land itself at an airport equipped with ILS IIIC. If you’re landing in a corn field because your engine stopped spinning (generally a bad day) the situation is a bit different. This is why I think fully autonomous planes carrying humans won’t happen for a really long time. The stakes when shit goes sideways is really high and it takes skill and a bit of luck to recover from that. Computers don’t yet have that.
The problem with dealing with a departure stall is they’re extremely deadly, happen faster than a person can react to, and are in general unrecoverable all because of the lack of altitude. If it was the case that you could easily deal with a departure stall in the 737-MAX then they would have seen no need to implement MCAS.
I don’t know specifically about the MAX, but based on the thrust vector if a pilot in a stall put in more power before nosing down the plane would pitch up and you’d be put into an even deeper stall. The MCAS is there to nose down automatically for you if a stall is detected.
Esketamine doesn’t have the same activity as racemic or Arketamine (S- hits some of the dopamine receptors harder and doesn’t bind with the sigma ones iirc). Patients seem to find esketamine more pleasant because of this and it’s eliminated faster than R- so patients can (probably) get back to normal faster.
(Edit: had my right from left mixed up. It’s been a while)
On a lot of systems the fortran compiler is often named fortran and usually aliased as for and fortran in the shell. I know as well on VMS, RSX, and RSTS you, at a minimum, just need to type the first 3 chars of a command for DCL to figure out what it is.
I quite like the cases, personally. If you're not in a more formal context or writing (like say you're talking to friends or so) it lets you be a bit more fast and loose with word order, plus it can let you say things more concisely than you can with english. The only real solid annoyances I've had were adjectives. Learning all of the rules and endings around them sucked on some level and it felt really quite superfluous, but once you get them and you can gauge correctness just based on it "sounding right" it's not so bad.
Even if you were healthy you’d be in bad shape. I know from flying your mind goes quick when oxygen levels go down. You feel drunk and get a bit euphoric and refuse to acknowledge you’re in any trouble at all. Low oxygen, especially if the environment is dangerous or requires a clear mind and/or quick action, is a killer.
It might be less of a small bounce than the nose wheel not being on the ground and/or not having enough weight on it. I know Airbus and Boeing handle this differently, but I don't remember the details (I want to say Airbus allows reverse thrust once the mains are firmly on the ground but the nose isn't, but I need to check my manuals).
I really do find the inability to restart extremely interesting though. I'd bet it's a bug somewhere, but it would be alarming if Boeing programmed in a lock-out on the failed engine(s) (I've heard it talked about as a solution to the sudden deployment of reverse thrust in flight) .
Not to mention that they're easier to diagnose and fix. Having diagnostic data available to you was fantastic for me as a young car nerd with no experience.
This is fantastic advice. The only thing I can really add is you should be keeping track of what’s around you, don’t look just before a lane change. Having good situational awareness is the most important thing when driving.
I disagree. I would bet they have tooling and jigs to build a Soyuz, and this hole could be the outcome of a poorly clamped and placed jig. Having a jig would explain why they’re using a handheld drill and why there’s no evidence of measurement.
Slight quibble: you'd probably still want variable pitch props. Variable pitch props give you a lot of options for noise, speed, efficiency, etc that I wouldn't want to give up just because I have a different power plant. They're also extremely useful for engine-outs (you can feather them which reduces drag significantly) and for landing (you can reverse them which helps which reduces load on your brakes and lets you do questionable things if you need to get into a small strip.)
No, my first instinct is to give it the beans and push the nose down more because more often then not you're in a stall if that happens.
Also, as a general "rule", it's pretty common for American aircraft to provide easily accessible overrides to the envelope protection stuff. I've never seen the cockpit of an Airbus, but, from what my friends have said, it's much harder to do. I don't know if Boeing is going in that direction, but I doubt they would.
On the punishment for murder end of things, they neither know or accept Indian sovereignty, so applying Indian law on them doesn't make sense. As far as the Sentinelese are concerned they're being invaded. This is more similar to a case where a soldier that doesn't know the war is over kills someone. It doesn't make sense and isn't fair to prosecute them because they're working on old information that would make the murder they committed okay legally.
I completely disagree that it's wrong to not introduce them to modern technology. To do that it would require one of us to go visit them which would probably kill them because of our diseases. I would argue it's more wrong to kill them than to not give them access to modern technology.
No question is stupid! For fentanyl at least that can totally happen. On of the common ways to administer it is via a transdermal patch. It’s one of the major selling points of fentanyl and why people that need ridiculous amounts of opioids because of burns or cancer like it.
None of this is true. Wiring harnesses aren't water tight, primarily to prevent corrosion. If you have a totally water tight harness, and water some how gets in, it has no way to dry and will cause corrosion.
You absolutely can splice a harness and have it have the same characteristics, I do it every day.
No, that almost certainly wouldn't happen. If you declare, you're basically given cart blanche provided you can reasonably justify your actions, and if an AFB is closer than a civilian airport, for example, its absolutely okay to land there (though you should probably give them a call first saying you're landing). Your first priority is not dying; legal consequences don't matter when you're in that situation, and the FAA knows that. If breaking a law will save you they'd rather you do that than die, and they almost certainly won't punish you for it.
Buprenorphine also increases cardiac mortality by increasing the QT interval. Buprenorphine is used over methadone mostly because its a partial agonist of the mu-opioid receptor which basically limits how high you can get.