Things you always wanted to know the answer to [Vol. 3]
Discussion
Cool keyboard player ?
What about the guy that wrestled his heavy Hammond B3, wedged knives in the keys,
somersaulted while playing a concert piano (WITH the piano and seat belt),
blew up his Moog Synthesizer, played Bach classics standing on the opposite side of the keys,
all this in 3-hour concerts that had everything from jazzy acoustic improvisations
to full-blown electric bombast prog rock and pure rock´n roll ?
RIP Keith Emerson.
What about the guy that wrestled his heavy Hammond B3, wedged knives in the keys,
somersaulted while playing a concert piano (WITH the piano and seat belt),
blew up his Moog Synthesizer, played Bach classics standing on the opposite side of the keys,
all this in 3-hour concerts that had everything from jazzy acoustic improvisations
to full-blown electric bombast prog rock and pure rock´n roll ?
RIP Keith Emerson.
StevieBee said:
Not sure if the term 'cool' applies but the keyboardist out of M83 is rather easy on the eye:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fO-ZbyDLUeA&t=...
tres, tres bonhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fO-ZbyDLUeA&t=...
Windy weather. If I think back to when I started driving, 105E Anglia, Mk1 & Mk2 Cortina, Mk 1 Escort, Mini, any really windy weather from cross winds and you got blown all over the place.
Modern cars not so much. Why?
Manufacturers are more savvy about aerodynamics, true, but would have thought that something designed to have least resistance in a straight line, which is 99.99% of the time, then wouldn't they be more affected by large crosswind gusts?
OK, cars are also a lot heavier, that would improve things, but they are also a lot larger so more area in side profile so that works the other way and increases susceptibility.
Modern cars not so much. Why?
Manufacturers are more savvy about aerodynamics, true, but would have thought that something designed to have least resistance in a straight line, which is 99.99% of the time, then wouldn't they be more affected by large crosswind gusts?
OK, cars are also a lot heavier, that would improve things, but they are also a lot larger so more area in side profile so that works the other way and increases susceptibility.
FiF said:
Manufacturers are more savvy about aerodynamics, true, but would have thought that something designed to have least resistance in a straight line, which is 99.99% of the time, then wouldn't they be more affected by large crosswind gusts?
Good point, that was an issue with early Sierras. Something about the centre of pressure being a long way forward.FiF said:
Windy weather. If I think back to when I started driving, 105E Anglia, Mk1 & Mk2 Cortina, Mk 1 Escort, Mini, any really windy weather from cross winds and you got blown all over the place.
Modern cars not so much. Why?
Manufacturers are more savvy about aerodynamics, true, but would have thought that something designed to have least resistance in a straight line, which is 99.99% of the time, then wouldn't they be more affected by large crosswind gusts?
OK, cars are also a lot heavier, that would improve things, but they are also a lot larger so more area in side profile so that works the other way and increases susceptibility.
wider tyres, with better grip, will contribute a lot. Modern cars not so much. Why?
Manufacturers are more savvy about aerodynamics, true, but would have thought that something designed to have least resistance in a straight line, which is 99.99% of the time, then wouldn't they be more affected by large crosswind gusts?
OK, cars are also a lot heavier, that would improve things, but they are also a lot larger so more area in side profile so that works the other way and increases susceptibility.
Shakermaker said:
FiF said:
Windy weather. If I think back to when I started driving, 105E Anglia, Mk1 & Mk2 Cortina, Mk 1 Escort, Mini, any really windy weather from cross winds and you got blown all over the place.
Modern cars not so much. Why?
Manufacturers are more savvy about aerodynamics, true, but would have thought that something designed to have least resistance in a straight line, which is 99.99% of the time, then wouldn't they be more affected by large crosswind gusts?
OK, cars are also a lot heavier, that would improve things, but they are also a lot larger so more area in side profile so that works the other way and increases susceptibility.
wider tyres, with better grip, will contribute a lot. Modern cars not so much. Why?
Manufacturers are more savvy about aerodynamics, true, but would have thought that something designed to have least resistance in a straight line, which is 99.99% of the time, then wouldn't they be more affected by large crosswind gusts?
OK, cars are also a lot heavier, that would improve things, but they are also a lot larger so more area in side profile so that works the other way and increases susceptibility.
The suspension in the S-Class (and I'm sure in other things too) detects cross-winds and compensates accordingly.
Here's a strange one.
There are loads of videos on YouTube of really tarty trashy looking women cranking Citroen 2CV's that are reluctant or rigged not to start.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=crank...
I could understand the odd one, but there are loads, it's like a weird "to do" thing, hire a Russian prostitute and then film her cranking a 2CV.
Why?
There are loads of videos on YouTube of really tarty trashy looking women cranking Citroen 2CV's that are reluctant or rigged not to start.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=crank...
I could understand the odd one, but there are loads, it's like a weird "to do" thing, hire a Russian prostitute and then film her cranking a 2CV.
Why?
Say I have a rope with a breaking strain of 50kg.
I need to cross a chasm by swinging on the rope, but I weigh 100kg.
If I throw the rope over a convenient branch hanging over the chasm, so it loops down and I can hold both ends, will it support 100kg (as it is now a double rope)?
A mate swears it will, and I say it won't - it will still only hold 50kg.
Who wins?
I need to cross a chasm by swinging on the rope, but I weigh 100kg.
If I throw the rope over a convenient branch hanging over the chasm, so it loops down and I can hold both ends, will it support 100kg (as it is now a double rope)?
A mate swears it will, and I say it won't - it will still only hold 50kg.
Who wins?
Ayahuasca said:
Say I have a rope with a breaking strain of 50kg.
I need to cross a chasm by swinging on the rope, but I weigh 100kg.
If I throw the rope over a convenient branch hanging over the chasm, so it loops down and I can hold both ends, will it support 100kg (as it is now a double rope)?
A mate swears it will, and I say it won't - it will still only hold 50kg.
Who wins?
If you keep the tension equal on both ends, I think your mate is right.I need to cross a chasm by swinging on the rope, but I weigh 100kg.
If I throw the rope over a convenient branch hanging over the chasm, so it loops down and I can hold both ends, will it support 100kg (as it is now a double rope)?
A mate swears it will, and I say it won't - it will still only hold 50kg.
Who wins?
Ayahuasca said:
Say I have a rope with a breaking strain of 50kg.
I need to cross a chasm by swinging on the rope, but I weigh 100kg.
If I throw the rope over a convenient branch hanging over the chasm, so it loops down and I can hold both ends, will it support 100kg (as it is now a double rope)?
A mate swears it will, and I say it won't - it will still only hold 50kg.
Who wins?
If you just looped it over then I reckon it would break as you're still relying on essentially one piece of rope over the branch. However if you tied both ends to the branch then hung off the double rope you should be ok.I need to cross a chasm by swinging on the rope, but I weigh 100kg.
If I throw the rope over a convenient branch hanging over the chasm, so it loops down and I can hold both ends, will it support 100kg (as it is now a double rope)?
A mate swears it will, and I say it won't - it will still only hold 50kg.
Who wins?
I think...
Nimby said:
Ayahuasca said:
Say I have a rope with a breaking strain of 50kg.
I need to cross a chasm by swinging on the rope, but I weigh 100kg.
If I throw the rope over a convenient branch hanging over the chasm, so it loops down and I can hold both ends, will it support 100kg (as it is now a double rope)?
A mate swears it will, and I say it won't - it will still only hold 50kg.
Who wins?
If you keep the tension equal on both ends, I think your mate is right.I need to cross a chasm by swinging on the rope, but I weigh 100kg.
If I throw the rope over a convenient branch hanging over the chasm, so it loops down and I can hold both ends, will it support 100kg (as it is now a double rope)?
A mate swears it will, and I say it won't - it will still only hold 50kg.
Who wins?
Balmoral said:
Here's a strange one.
There are loads of videos on YouTube of really tarty trashy looking women cranking Citroen 2CV's that are reluctant or rigged not to start.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=crank...
I could understand the odd one, but there are loads, it's like a weird "to do" thing, hire a Russian prostitute and then film her cranking a 2CV.
Why?
OOh, I say! There are loads of videos on YouTube of really tarty trashy looking women cranking Citroen 2CV's that are reluctant or rigged not to start.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=crank...
I could understand the odd one, but there are loads, it's like a weird "to do" thing, hire a Russian prostitute and then film her cranking a 2CV.
Why?
spitfire-ian said:
Ayahuasca said:
Say I have a rope with a breaking strain of 50kg.
I need to cross a chasm by swinging on the rope, but I weigh 100kg.
If I throw the rope over a convenient branch hanging over the chasm, so it loops down and I can hold both ends, will it support 100kg (as it is now a double rope)?
A mate swears it will, and I say it won't - it will still only hold 50kg.
Who wins?
If you just looped it over then I reckon it would break as you're still relying on essentially one piece of rope over the branch. However if you tied both ends to the branch then hung off the double rope you should be ok.I need to cross a chasm by swinging on the rope, but I weigh 100kg.
If I throw the rope over a convenient branch hanging over the chasm, so it loops down and I can hold both ends, will it support 100kg (as it is now a double rope)?
A mate swears it will, and I say it won't - it will still only hold 50kg.
Who wins?
I think...
SpeckledJim said:
Shakermaker said:
FiF said:
Windy weather. If I think back to when I started driving, 105E Anglia, Mk1 & Mk2 Cortina, Mk 1 Escort, Mini, any really windy weather from cross winds and you got blown all over the place.
Modern cars not so much. Why?
Manufacturers are more savvy about aerodynamics, true, but would have thought that something designed to have least resistance in a straight line, which is 99.99% of the time, then wouldn't they be more affected by large crosswind gusts?
OK, cars are also a lot heavier, that would improve things, but they are also a lot larger so more area in side profile so that works the other way and increases susceptibility.
wider tyres, with better grip, will contribute a lot. Modern cars not so much. Why?
Manufacturers are more savvy about aerodynamics, true, but would have thought that something designed to have least resistance in a straight line, which is 99.99% of the time, then wouldn't they be more affected by large crosswind gusts?
OK, cars are also a lot heavier, that would improve things, but they are also a lot larger so more area in side profile so that works the other way and increases susceptibility.
The suspension in the S-Class (and I'm sure in other things too) detects cross-winds and compensates accordingly.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff