Assume v. Presume

Mike0001 said:
Minimize cost? Safety? Reliability? :confused:
Click to expand...
Well, yes. Cost obviously, but also the others since an excess of either will impact on cost and possibly weight and function too.
The ultimate in vehicle safety and reliability would probably be something like a tank that has been tested for 20 years before going into production ... not really an engineer's solution :thumbsdown:
 
MikeSh said:
probably be something like a tank that has been tested for 20 years before going into production ... not really an engineer's solution :thumbsdown:
Click to expand...
Or a land rover? Over engineered cars tend to break down a lot, but at least simple means easy to repair.

Don't get me started about over engineered phones that get thrown out when the battery goes...
 
Gamecock fighting is illegal here, though we still have cockpits in aeroplanes. The etymology is different, though, a strange convergence. I am sure someone will object to the term flight deck to describe a cockpit, but at least it saves some fowl blood.

Airport instead of aerodrome? Bah, humbug!
 
Mike0001 said:
Airport instead of aerodrome? Bah, humbug!
Click to expand...
The local landing strip has been known as an RAF base, an aerodrome and now a "City Airport" - despite being in the county. If the borough council pass their own plans, it may well become a housing estate. :mad:
Flight deck: Confusing on an aircraft carrier. "Meet me on the flight deck". Is that the runway of the ship or the cockpit of an aeroplane?
 
I'd say aerodrome was a generic name for any place of operation for aeroplanes whereas airport suggests a commercial aerodrome. (My auto-correct doesn't even have aerodrome in its dictionary.)
Most carrier based aircraft aren't big enough to have a 'flight deck' ;) . Anyway, the flight deck is so big you'd need to be more specific about where on it you wanted to meet.
 
MikeSh said:
Most carrier based aircraft aren't big enough to have a 'flight deck' ;) . Anyway, the flight deck is so big you'd need to be more specific about where on it you wanted to meet.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure the UK has any aircraft carriers in service so not currently a problem.
 
Mike0001 said:
But when we do, there will be enough room to park a helicopter or two. Sorry, hélicoptères!
Click to expand...
Probably not enough space for the F-35s. What we need is proper VTOL - not STOVL.
Peut-être devriez-vous écrire "Mais quand nous le faisons, il y aura assez de place pour garer un hélicoptère ou deux".
(Don't you just love Google translate? If the above is wrong, it's Google's fault.)
 
EEPhil said:
Probably not enough space for the F-35s. What we need is proper VTOL - not STOVL.
Click to expand...
The F35 can do VTO, but like the Harrier, and in fact helicopters, it can carry more weight and use less fuel by getting some forward speed before lift-off. Probably be the case until anti-grav becomes a reality.
(Don't you love how in Stars Wars a massive spaceship can hover over a city for days with no 'thrust', but when it wants to move it lights up 4 massive exhaust pipes. My suspended disbelief always starts to suffer it's own anti-grav problems about then :eek:)
 
Heard on the news last night that a couple of accidents on a road in Kent were caused by the bad weather. No thy weren't, they were caused by bad driving.:eek:
 
Trev said:
Heard on the news last night that a couple of accidents on a road in Kent were caused by the bad weather. No thy weren't, they were caused by bad driving.:eek:
Click to expand...
Caused by a combination of inclement weather and poor driving?

No, just a consequence of the laws of physics. Are the laws of physics bad?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top