What you are describing is a somewhat routine adjustment and if it's non-inferior... sure. But it sure reads differently in different sources...
315 karma · joined April 19, 2016
What you are describing is a somewhat routine adjustment and if it's non-inferior... sure. But it sure reads differently in different sources...
I still scratch my head about some no-brainer vaccines such as HPV. All upsides, prevents the literal cancer. No downsides.
While it’s a real plane, I think we can both agree this is more of a prototype than what the general public would consider to be a passenger plane.
Yes, energy recovery is possible. It’s not happening currently in commercial aviation.
RAT is only used when sh*t hits the fan. Even then, it can help you power some hydraulics / electrical, not “store” energy for further flight.
The OP asked - in a low fuel situation, can the energy spent on a climb get effectively recovered - and the answer is not really. We convert as much as we can into unpowered (low-powered) descent. But once you are at a spot where you make a final decision to land or not, you are by design low and slow - and all that energy you had 15m ago is gone.
If you need to keep flying, those engines need to spool back up. And that takes fuel.
One of the challenges of aeronautics is the efficient disposition of the potential energy without converting it all into kinetic energy (ie speed) so that the landing happens at an optimally low speed - thus giving you a chance to brake and slow down at the end.
Thus, there is very little incentive to keep you in the airport less, and multiple incentives to keep you there longer.
Most journals do not pay for reviewers time. There are some experiments that allow for this, but I would say 99% of the reviews out there are done... "out of the goodness of the reviewer's heart".
There are indirect benefits to being a reviewer, such as early access to unpublished work, "goodwill" with the editor, etc.
Wet lab is hard, and everyone is chasing the eureka moment.
* converting PDFs to HTML is an annoying problem
* searchability of the repo is likely an annoying problem
* any new features that stakeholders want added (commenting, annotations, etc) * ongoing hosting / CDN cost
It's one thing to show you the last 24hr of tweets. Another to get a complete twitter history for given uid.
In this current case, large surface parking lots are a terrible use of space. They generate very little taxes, contribute towards the heat island effect, and make the general area surrounding them less walkable.
The example you provided is definitely believable. I don't know a single modern (new) location that successfully changed the habits of residents from "more-car" to "less-car". And I don't necessarily have an answer what's a good solution. Having regulation like the French do at least helps nudge the outcomes somewhat.
Generally, I am against large surface lots (American style). So seeing someone introduce a simple incentive that both a) introduces a limit to their size AND b) offsets some of the blight for larger ones...
I am willing to see how well it works.
> I paid off all my debts, bills and rent, and the cold realization hit me: I had nothing left over to show for it.
This is trying to measure ionosphere disturbances which affect signal propagation rates via ground reference stations. The real-time model is then calculated and distributed using ground stations and geostationary satellites.
GPS is way, way cool, and it's a pity the extent of its engineering is not better known.
Because GPS is way cool. First, there is the official site: https://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/performance/accuracy/ I am far from being an expert, but being a flying nerd, that's what I can tell you:
The more satellites in sight you have access to, the cooler stuff you can do with GPS. Minimum to establish 2D (on globe projection 2D) location is 3 sats, minimum for altitude is 4 sats. There are mathematical simulations you can do to see if, and when, a given aircraft will have access to 4 sats (or more), called RAIM: https://www.mygdc.com/new/static/usermanuals/web_help/RAIM_P...
Now, things get even better if you use 4+ sats, or sats from different constellations (I am not sure how mature is cross-constellation data validation, however, so let's pretend 1 constellation for now). With 5 sats, the receiver can calculate the position even more precisely, determine the level of URE, etc. You can even detect that one source is unreliable, and discard it (effectively falling back to 4 sats). With even more sats you can (theoretically) do cool data analysis, where you can determine those factors even more precisely.
Now, add the inertial factors. Many passenger have either in-software (history of previous positions) or in-hardware (think accelerometers, magnetometers) inertial data sources. A sophisticated flight management software (FMS) can cross-corelate the inertial data with GNSS data and determine when the latter becomes unreliable.
All of those measurements and factors can subsequently be reported via ADS-B or ACARS, to help with fleet management, and general predictive maintenance. While aviation technology might sometimes look way out of date at a first glance, the modern airplanes have some really cool technology hiding in it.
Two or more employees addressing their employer about improving their pay. Two or more employees discussing work-related issues beyond pay, such as safety concerns, with each other. An employee speaking to an employer on behalf of one or more co-workers about improving workplace conditions."
Would that letter fall under that? I think there is at least a somewhat credible claim it could (and also a credible opposing counterclaim that the form of speech was meant to be defamatory/disparaging, and not a protected activity), but I am not a lawyer.
And for every cancelled experiment / unfunded grant - there is someone else getting that money instead. I want to believe that savings from the operations of the SOFIA will be channeled into another scientific project. I am pretty sure there is a lot of smart folks out there that will happily convert newly available budget into interesting observations.
But you see, they don't care. If there is no incentive for them to do it, why would they? Good neighborhood-will will pay for a donation to a local charity cause, etc, but will not make meaningful expensive changes to the SOP.
Ideally this is the point where a regulator (of some kind) steps in and nudges the change. We all know what the political problems behind that are - despite mounting evidence of how damaging diesel exhaust particles are to us, and our children.
Now imagine we could cut the above in half, and then use some fraction of those savings (as a nation) promoting wider adoption of vaccines globally. If we've reached higher levels of vaccination earlier (in the USA), more people without access to the vaccine currently would've been able to get it.
It seems you are doing exactly that, which is great.
In English "advise", alas, not used in the common language in regards to mail, like it is used in Polish (and Czech?).
One time I tried to have a video call with someone higher up in AWS, and they were unable to join a Google Meet call we have scheduled for that meeting (and only realized at t+2m).