NorthwestBlue
Bronze Member
daTeacha said:
Didn't think about that. Well, that settles it.
will it take off?
- Thread starter schmism
- Start date
- Views: 117664
Didn't think about that. Well, that settles it.
patrick_g
Elite Member
da Teacha (Du-uh Teacha?)
Long before tire expansion did that the tires and or wheels would explode (fly apart) but only if you keep mixing in doses of reality whenever you want instead of discussing what could happen if...
Actually since I am wiling to take either set of assumptions, to get there from here I would just assume the "WILL FLY" set and hope the tires didn't fail at twice the liftoff speed.
About the rubber band catapult... I have built model soaring planes that use ruber band (surgical tubing) catapults to launch and rubber bands melted through by a burning timer fuse to hold the horizontal stabilizer in flight position till the timer fuse (dethermalizer) melted the rubber band and the horizontal stab "kicks up" rendering the plane unaerodynamic and you get it back instead of maybe chasing it for many miles and losing it.
Pat
Long before tire expansion did that the tires and or wheels would explode (fly apart) but only if you keep mixing in doses of reality whenever you want instead of discussing what could happen if...
Actually since I am wiling to take either set of assumptions, to get there from here I would just assume the "WILL FLY" set and hope the tires didn't fail at twice the liftoff speed.
About the rubber band catapult... I have built model soaring planes that use ruber band (surgical tubing) catapults to launch and rubber bands melted through by a burning timer fuse to hold the horizontal stabilizer in flight position till the timer fuse (dethermalizer) melted the rubber band and the horizontal stab "kicks up" rendering the plane unaerodynamic and you get it back instead of maybe chasing it for many miles and losing it.
Pat
NorthwestBlue
Bronze Member
Pat,
Interesting background. Interdiciplinary tranfer seems to be more the norm than the exception. I just spoke with a friend that was working on F-18 systems design, but now is in the audio visual industry.
If you have a background in a scientific/technology field you've already proven yourself capable of adapting and learning. Not overly difficult to change fields.
If you told me too much you would probably disappear before you could get the first shot off.
Interesting background. Interdiciplinary tranfer seems to be more the norm than the exception. I just spoke with a friend that was working on F-18 systems design, but now is in the audio visual industry.
If you have a background in a scientific/technology field you've already proven yourself capable of adapting and learning. Not overly difficult to change fields.If you told me too much you would probably disappear before you could get the first shot off.
patrick_g
Elite Member
NorthwestBlue. I'm sure you are right. In the USAF (during Viet Nam fracas) I was not permitted to leave CONUS without special permission until I had been away from my work for 6 months. including after I left the USAF. After 6 months the assumption was that the volatile nature of the classified I dealt with was mostly stale and not of sufficient interest for any of the bad guys to nab me.
Working at the lab I ended up so deep in the SCI world that my rights under the constitution of the US were permanently abriged and non-restorable. They got real serious about that stuff, especially after the Walker thing and certain other "incidents." In addition to the random call to pee in the bottle to which I once responded, "from here?" a distance of over a mile, I also was subject to periodic and random polygraph sessions with some very serious citizens.
Those were some of the downsides but there were upsides as well like a paycheck, early retirement, educational opportunities, meeting interesting people and working on interesting projects.
Oh, did I mention that I used to be an Aircraft designer? When I was in highschool mostly. I used to scratch build flying models with no instructions or plans. I did look up some NACA airfoil shapes and such but just sort of well, winged it. I designed mostly U-control but some free flight and some RC as well as soaring planes. I used to like to add bomb racks ()dropped cherry bombs) and rocket launchers. In those days if you could walk into the Ben Franklin five and dime store and lay your $ on the counter you could buy fireworks. I used an old Model T spark coil for ignition on the U-control models, sending the high voltage up the wire lines and using insulated bellcranks at the top. Later after seeing how Estes Engineeering ignighted their rocket motors I switched techniques. Then I could ignite fuses by RC and really terrorize the countryside, trying to drop bombs into cardbord boxes set up as targets or shoot rockets into the box.
Funny but as many WEIRD things as I did, I never tried to build and test a prototype MCB to prevent a model from taking off.
About the interdisciplinary thing... The last time back in grad school at over 50 yrs old and having a fairly broad science and engineering bacground I found that a contention that I had made before was certainly true. Engineering is engineering is engineering. I have engineered HW, SW, and then training solutions. It seems that structured analytical methodologies came late to the world of education and things the profs were experimenting with and trying to codify were "old hat" in the world of modern software engineering and to a degree in other engineering disiplines. Some of my profs mistakenly thought I was really learning the concepts from them quickly and applying them as they hoped when in fact I was doing what I had learned to do in recent but previous years of studying formal analytical methodoligies relating to mostly software engineering.
There is an engineering approach similar to the scientific method that is applicable over a broad spectrum of divergent disciplines. You need to learn the underpinings of the discipline in question such as an architect needs to know physics and strengths of materials and such but at a higher level of abstraction it is nearly the same old stuff as far as what info is needed, how to analyze it, and use it to guide the formulaton of a solution.
Now I do tough stuff like try to convince 3 heifers to join their 9 sisters at the trough instead of standing at an open gate and bawling to be fed while watching the others eat from a distance of 75 ft. Well, I do get some intellectual stimulation. There are fly vs no fly discussions. I get to finish building my house.
Pat
Working at the lab I ended up so deep in the SCI world that my rights under the constitution of the US were permanently abriged and non-restorable. They got real serious about that stuff, especially after the Walker thing and certain other "incidents." In addition to the random call to pee in the bottle to which I once responded, "from here?" a distance of over a mile, I also was subject to periodic and random polygraph sessions with some very serious citizens.
Those were some of the downsides but there were upsides as well like a paycheck, early retirement, educational opportunities, meeting interesting people and working on interesting projects.
Oh, did I mention that I used to be an Aircraft designer? When I was in highschool mostly. I used to scratch build flying models with no instructions or plans. I did look up some NACA airfoil shapes and such but just sort of well, winged it. I designed mostly U-control but some free flight and some RC as well as soaring planes. I used to like to add bomb racks ()dropped cherry bombs) and rocket launchers. In those days if you could walk into the Ben Franklin five and dime store and lay your $ on the counter you could buy fireworks. I used an old Model T spark coil for ignition on the U-control models, sending the high voltage up the wire lines and using insulated bellcranks at the top. Later after seeing how Estes Engineeering ignighted their rocket motors I switched techniques. Then I could ignite fuses by RC and really terrorize the countryside, trying to drop bombs into cardbord boxes set up as targets or shoot rockets into the box.
Funny but as many WEIRD things as I did, I never tried to build and test a prototype MCB to prevent a model from taking off.
About the interdisciplinary thing... The last time back in grad school at over 50 yrs old and having a fairly broad science and engineering bacground I found that a contention that I had made before was certainly true. Engineering is engineering is engineering. I have engineered HW, SW, and then training solutions. It seems that structured analytical methodologies came late to the world of education and things the profs were experimenting with and trying to codify were "old hat" in the world of modern software engineering and to a degree in other engineering disiplines. Some of my profs mistakenly thought I was really learning the concepts from them quickly and applying them as they hoped when in fact I was doing what I had learned to do in recent but previous years of studying formal analytical methodoligies relating to mostly software engineering.
There is an engineering approach similar to the scientific method that is applicable over a broad spectrum of divergent disciplines. You need to learn the underpinings of the discipline in question such as an architect needs to know physics and strengths of materials and such but at a higher level of abstraction it is nearly the same old stuff as far as what info is needed, how to analyze it, and use it to guide the formulaton of a solution.
Now I do tough stuff like try to convince 3 heifers to join their 9 sisters at the trough instead of standing at an open gate and bawling to be fed while watching the others eat from a distance of 75 ft. Well, I do get some intellectual stimulation. There are fly vs no fly discussions. I get to finish building my house.
Pat
1948berg
Gold Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2006
- Messages
- 410
- Location
- Southern Norway
- Tractor
- A Fergie-MF 35 gas- Mf 165- Mf 6161- Unimog- Fiat 880
What if the plane had skies instead of wheels, and the rubber band was covered with ice?
A truck driver was pulled in for weight control, he was carrying hens, far too many, just as he drove on to the weight he slammed the door, scaring all the hens so they they were airborn, and he came out scot free.
An aqueduct is getting weak, and can not carry more than one pound more than at present, a heavy boat comes along, what happends?
What happends if one of the crew is jumping from the boat on to the aqueduct?
A truck driver was pulled in for weight control, he was carrying hens, far too many, just as he drove on to the weight he slammed the door, scaring all the hens so they they were airborn, and he came out scot free.
An aqueduct is getting weak, and can not carry more than one pound more than at present, a heavy boat comes along, what happends?
What happends if one of the crew is jumping from the boat on to the aqueduct?
patrick_g
Elite Member
1948berg said:
Roling pins, tank tracks, whatever, if it rotates it is same same. Skis will depend on friction alone since no rotating mass. MCB will have to be redesigned for a lot more speed! Will have to apply for Government grant to study icy rubber band, results unknown.
Some of the air moved by the hens wings might miss the trailer so might have reduction in apparent weight.
If the wake of the boat doesn't start a catastrophe the weight won't as it displaces its own weight to float and makes no change to weight supported by aquaduct. Same story re the man overboard.
What about a glass of ice water filled to brim and a little more (aided by surface tension) such that a single drop more and it will spill over. The ice cubes are floating well above the rim of the glass. How much water will spill over when the ice melts and adds its water to the glass?
Pat
Last edited:
Egon
Epic Contributor
How hot is the room Pat? And what is the humidity? and what is the pressure?
And can you float a steel pin on water? As for numbers Egon likes all numbers as long as they do not exceed 10. Getting old and stiff and have trouble bending over to get my shoes and socks off.
NorthwestBlue
Bronze Member
Pat,
I don't know, but building an MCB might be considered tame in comparison.
You brought back memories (and a perfect winter project with my boys, thanks) with the story of your model building days. My very first airplane design was in grade school. It was the third stage of a model rocket. A glider... come to think about it NASA might owe me reparations. I got into Control-Line and RC as well. I never did mix the rocketry with the RC, but might just have to in the future.
Can't help you with the heifers, but Darwin might say "It's time for Steak".
I don't know, but building an MCB might be considered tame in comparison.
You brought back memories (and a perfect winter project with my boys, thanks) with the story of your model building days. My very first airplane design was in grade school. It was the third stage of a model rocket. A glider... come to think about it NASA might owe me reparations.
I got into Control-Line and RC as well. I never did mix the rocketry with the RC, but might just have to in the future. Can't help you with the heifers, but Darwin might say "It's time for Steak".
TomKioti
Gold Member
Man you guys are impressive. I thought I could argue a point but holy cow! you guys are AWESOME!!!. That being said... it's not gonna fly if the MCB is perfectly synchronized with the forward movement of the aircraft. I can't give you a thesis on this but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night
daTeacha
Veteran Member
C'mon Pat, I thought you were challenging us. The ice "problem" is not worthy of discussion here unless you want to get really technical. The ice has a density of about .9 g/cm^3, which is less than that of the water in which is floating. (Obvious since it wouldn't float otherwise) Melting the ice will reduce the volume, but the volume of water released will exactly match the volume of water displaced by the cube (Thank you, Archimedes), unless the cube is pure water and the water in which it is floating is some kind of solution. In that case there will be a slight difference in volume depending on the nature of the solution. Of course all this is variable with temperature. Adjust the temperature of the whole mess to 4C for minimal volume, assuming pure water.
