electric road transport
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Italian Tuneups
Next: 20mph when lights are flashing
From: Ian Jackson on 8 Jul 2010 04:23 In message <qfjl78qf1wkf.nae5mkltva22$.dlg(a)40tude.net>, Chelsea Tractor Man <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> writes >On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 19:34:40 +0100, Colin McKenzie wrote: > >> You have to accelerate a lot >> of water to move a boat at consyant speed. Accelerating air is a lot >> easier. > >you have to push some water aside but the lift is free. Aeroplane lift isnt >free and floating on air is a lot harder than floating on water. And, unlike a railway, the 'track' is always dead level. -- Ian
From: Mrcheerful on 8 Jul 2010 04:39 Ian Jackson wrote: > In message <qfjl78qf1wkf.nae5mkltva22$.dlg(a)40tude.net>, Chelsea > Tractor Man <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> writes >> On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 19:34:40 +0100, Colin McKenzie wrote: >> >>> You have to accelerate a lot >>> of water to move a boat at consyant speed. Accelerating air is a lot >>> easier. >> >> you have to push some water aside but the lift is free. Aeroplane >> lift isnt free and floating on air is a lot harder than floating on >> water. > > And, unlike a railway, the 'track' is always dead level. and needs very little maintenance and lets faster 'conveyances' pass in either direction without extra track/points, also much less danger of crashes at level crossings, no 'pedestrians' stepping in front of you, cyclists are forced to keep out of your way and on their own path.
From: Mike P on 8 Jul 2010 04:45 On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 09:37:49 +0100, Chelsea Tractor Man garbled: > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 08:36:48 +0100, Mike P wrote: > >>> thats as good a proof as we need. I can move a loaded narrowboat on >>> the end >>> of a rope, I cannot keep that weight up in the air. >> >> It's the lift innit? >> >> I bet if you had a good strong wind providing some lift, you could pull >> a glider on the end of a rope along in the air ;-) > > yes, a very small one. That would be a kite... theory is the same though, if you had a 150mph gale, you could pull a glider along, or a Cessna. >The power needed to push an aerofoil through the > air and generate enough lift to get a narrow boat's weight off the > ground is large, Flying narrow boats? Cool. I want one ;-) -- Mike P
From: Ian Jackson on 8 Jul 2010 05:02 In message <i14384$ug5$5(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Mike P <privacy(a)privacy.net> writes >On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 09:37:49 +0100, Chelsea Tractor Man garbled: > >> On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 08:36:48 +0100, Mike P wrote: >> >>>> thats as good a proof as we need. I can move a loaded narrowboat on >>>> the end >>>> of a rope, I cannot keep that weight up in the air. >>> >>> It's the lift innit? >>> >>> I bet if you had a good strong wind providing some lift, you could pull >>> a glider on the end of a rope along in the air ;-) >> >> yes, a very small one. > >That would be a kite... theory is the same though, if you had a 150mph >gale, you could pull a glider along, or a Cessna. > Errrrr... No. An aeroplane would have to be moving forward THROUGH the air with a differential (airspeed) of at least 60mph. If you towed an aircraft with a kite, you would simply have the aircraft dangling vertically beneath the kite (unless the kite was at a different altitude, where the air was moving much faster - say the jetstream?) >>The power needed to push an aerofoil through the >> air and generate enough lift to get a narrow boat's weight off the >> ground is large, > >Flying narrow boats? Cool. I want one ;-) > -- Ian
From: Ian Jackson on 8 Jul 2010 05:05
In message <K8gZn.52828$cJ6.8532(a)hurricane>, Mrcheerful <nbkm57(a)hotmail.co.uk> writes >Ian Jackson wrote: >> In message <qfjl78qf1wkf.nae5mkltva22$.dlg(a)40tude.net>, Chelsea >> Tractor Man <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> writes >>> On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 19:34:40 +0100, Colin McKenzie wrote: >>> >>>> You have to accelerate a lot >>>> of water to move a boat at consyant speed. Accelerating air is a lot >>>> easier. >>> >>> you have to push some water aside but the lift is free. Aeroplane >>> lift isnt free and floating on air is a lot harder than floating on >>> water. >> >> And, unlike a railway, the 'track' is always dead level. > >and needs very little maintenance and lets faster 'conveyances' pass in >either direction without extra track/points, also much less danger of >crashes at level crossings, no 'pedestrians' stepping in front of you, >cyclists are forced to keep out of your way and on their own path. > Eventually cyclists WILL discover a way to get in your way - even on a canal. It's only a matter of time! -- Ian |