« on: Yesterday at 22:57:37 »
The UK and EU forbid patents on perpetual motion machines.Not sure if the US does, but until quite recently there was a requirement to provide a working model, which was a lot more fun than a simple ban.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I am sorry you lost me. Why can't U be much greater than dark energy which can be X?Because U and X are volumes of space, not quantities of energy, and X is arbitrarily the bit of space we can see.
I definitely meant laying back , not on stomach . This would require small , at hand , controls & visor-mounted video display of forward/ down . Unnatural , but deadly ...P.The word is semisupine. Standard position in gliders where we need to minimise cross-sectional area and provide maximum comfort with minimum upholstery: the seat is an integral part of the fuselage structure. Problem is that your view downward is restricted (poor choice for ground attack) and such matters as ejection seats (not fitted in gliders, and bailing out from a spin is extremely difficult) get complicated if you recline by more than a comfortable car seat - about 15 degrees. To say nothing of the vomit-inducing properties of a head-down vertical climb or a low-level passage under autopilot.
Prone position in a custom-molded G-Couch should easily withstand 16G for short periods ,But my question was whether you have tried flying prone for an hour. The RAF, USAF and Luftwaffe have built prone prototypes
A much modified Gloster Meteor F8 fighter, the "prone position/prone pilot" Meteor, was used to evaluate the effects of acceleration/inertia-induced forces while flying in a prone position. Along with the Reid and Sigrist R.S.4 "Bobsleigh", the Gloster Meteor was engaged in a proof-of-concept experimental programme that proved in practice that the difficulties of operating the controls of the aircraft outweighed the advantages of sustaining higher "g" effects.Now available at a scrapyard near you.
A fuel truck could be an enablerThe last thing you want on the front line. At best a hugely visible explosive target, at worst an asset for the enemy to capture
...think of the plane as a Huey combined w/a tank .Like a Chinook, perhaps? Very handy, but always based well behind the action. And I think there is a reason why tanks have tracks, not wings. Something to do with very big guns, hiding in terrain, and providing armour that moves at the same rate as the infantry.
Troops would beg t o have that nearbyI doubt it. The front line is for fighting, not for refuelling and repairing machines, or for feeding and defending the umpteen very expensive blokes (including offduty aircrew) who do that. If you want medevac, you want to go to a hospital away from the enemy, so that is where you keep fuel (and fast-refuelling kit) and ammunition.
My hypothesis is that, as the background radiation there is mostly alpha, it may be comparable with the UK childhood leukemia clusters reported in the 1980s which were uniquely associated with those sites handling bare plutoniumSpoiler alert; they weren't.
I have to believe that the boots on the ground would love having a super-plane hidden amongst them , right at the throat of the enemy .Not if they have to build and defend a runway, hangar, ammunition store, fuel dump, workshop and canteen for the 10 technicians and 2 pilots needed to keep the aircraft working. The object of tank and infantry warfare is to advance as quickly as possible and occupy territory as thinly as necessary to control it, not to drag an air force around the planet. VTOL simplifies the requirement but 600 mph means that you can call up as much weaponry as you need from a properly equipped and self-defended base 10 miles behind the front line, and have it delivered in one minute.