How do you know the comparative numbers? All you can possibly compare is the numbers that are caught. As usual, the Left promoting stinky brown statistics.
The Wikipedia article says it is powered by four 350Hp engines. I don't know what your definition of low is, but 1400Hp to get 80kts just CAN'T be covered by it.
No, not in it's current incarnation. 10 ton payload. 92mph max speed, and that is with four 350Hp engines. With a ceiling of 20k ft, it can't be used in bad weather, and can't even be used if there is more than a slight breeze. 1/4 the payload of a truck. Likely slower than a truck, depending upon the prevailing winds (you only get a tailwind 25% of the time on average). The fuel requirements will be WAY higher than a typical 18 wheeler. I doubt even the racers have 1400Hp under the hood.
The reason planes supplanted dirigibles is because cargo capacity isn't how many tons you can carry at once.
That was one reason. Another was that the slightest wind made a takeoff or landing a near impossibility. Harnessing those huge sails (and that is what they basically are when they are fighting a wind), required a large contingent of humans. It also required that each one be stored in a hangar even for a short stay. Hangars of that size are a huge capital investment.
I agree, but much like not using trains for hauling cargo, I expect these won't be used either. Too slow to be
efficient. For some reason we prefer to waste enormous amounts of resources to ship things faster.
FTFY.
If you're paying a pilot to make sure that your cargo doesn't get away, these things would never make sense. With a top speed of 80kts, on four 350Hp engines this thing ain't going anywhere fast, is sucking a lot of fuel doing it. With a payload of only 10 tonnes, it would be more efficient to put it on a truck, and it would get to where it is going faster 75% of the time (there is a 75% chance on any routed flight that winds will be detrimental. IE, you only get a tailwind 25% of the time).
It's called intimidation, Bud. I never blink an eye at signing them. I've never once considered they might have an impact on future employment, and they haven't.
American companies keep doing this to us. I went to the grocery store last week to get some creamer for my coffee. There were probably a dozen brands offering all sorts of flavors. Some were organic. Some were fat reduced or fat free. Some were from happy cows according to the labels, and some were just from the grocery chain.
Fuck all that. Why can't one manufacturer just make what I want! Why do I have to CHOOSE!
My wife, and my ex-wife, both would not put on make-up or dress up if we were going out for lunch or hanging around the house. "Going out with the girls" would send them into hours of preening preparation.
Trying to blame make-up on misogyny is idiotic, and truly makes me wonder if you're actually married.
The article goes to great lengths to say that this went on for years. Why didn't they ask the first guy to show up the simple question, "Why did you think you would find your phone here?" They would say, "Because I used this free IP Adress locating website." Contact the website, and you're off to the races. It might not have gotten resolved until the second or third visit from SWAT, but they'd at least KNOW why it was happening. Having to hire a lawyer and then contact a university professor? Why didn't they just ask the people showing up?
If I go swimming in the ocean, there is enough of a difference between the surface and a few feet down that I can feel the difference. There is enough seasonal difference that there are actual "water temperature" reports to let vacationers know what it feels like.
These are things that I know of in my everyday life where I have experienced noticeable differences in water temperatures that are in the range of several degrees. These changes are natural and have occurred my entire life (>50 yrs). No one reasonable will contest that.
This study is claiming that a few tenths of a degree difference are destroying ecosystems. Am I a denialist if I ask how can these species easily live through constant fluctuations, and yet are killed off by temperature shifts that are an order of magnitude lower?
Institute policy for good reason. Put it on autopilot and ignore it forever.
Do you see ANYTHING wrong with that algorithm? We have a record amount of cheese because NOBODY wants it. And yet, we're producing more as demand continues to drop. At some point the dairy farmers have to figure out something else to do.
If your job can be replaced by a shell script, you are due for a skills upgrade.
As a SDET, my job is literally to automate people (including myself) out of a job, and that is the goal of most programmers. Just what do people think happened when a secretary was no longer needed to draft a letter, and calculators replaced dozens of engineers computing figures by hand?
And I think there is a surprising amount of evidence to indicate that US "intelligence" agencies do the same with companies in our influence. This is sort of SOP at this point, is it not?
Gender and Ethnic Studies departments will eventually all close, in the long term because enough new tenured faculty will be hired into the normal Lit and History departments that will hold nuanced enough views that such things become obsolete -- that will be for both good and ill, no doubt, but such is the way of things.
You apparently have not been paying attention to what happens to nuanced views in these universities. Understandable, considering the way most media outlets seem to have an allergy to nuanced views. Suffice it to say, that the only possible reason that you could have for suggesting that a statue of Robert E. Lee ever remain on campus is that you're a racist. There could never be any other possible reason.
Slashdot Mirror
I bet I know what is on your Facebook Ad Preferences.
Get out of California echo chamber for a minute and you'll see how ridiculous you sound.
The guy got elected President. More than "some" actually voted for him.
The US had quite a few biological samples roaming around up there, and even driving a rover around.
I've been to some of those countries. You're the fucking idiot.
And, who made Robert Frost a social expert.
Walls make good neighbors, as it delineates a property boundary and reduces conflict.
Contracts make for good business partners, as they delineate responsibilities and reduce conflict.
Fences and walls serve very good purposes. Why else do you think they are so popular?
How do you know the comparative numbers? All you can possibly compare is the numbers that are caught. As usual, the Left promoting stinky brown statistics.
has a low carbon footprint,
Citation needed.
The Wikipedia article says it is powered by four 350Hp engines. I don't know what your definition of low is, but 1400Hp to get 80kts just CAN'T be covered by it.
No, not in it's current incarnation. 10 ton payload. 92mph max speed, and that is with four 350Hp engines. With a ceiling of 20k ft, it can't be used in bad weather, and can't even be used if there is more than a slight breeze. 1/4 the payload of a truck. Likely slower than a truck, depending upon the prevailing winds (you only get a tailwind 25% of the time on average). The fuel requirements will be WAY higher than a typical 18 wheeler. I doubt even the racers have 1400Hp under the hood.
The reason planes supplanted dirigibles is because cargo capacity isn't how many tons you can carry at once.
That was one reason. Another was that the slightest wind made a takeoff or landing a near impossibility. Harnessing those huge sails (and that is what they basically are when they are fighting a wind), required a large contingent of humans. It also required that each one be stored in a hangar even for a short stay. Hangars of that size are a huge capital investment.
As long as your cargo weighs less that 10 tons. Sure.
I agree, but much like not using trains for hauling cargo, I expect these won't be used either. Too slow to be
efficient. For some reason we prefer to waste enormous amounts of resources to ship things faster.
FTFY.
If you're paying a pilot to make sure that your cargo doesn't get away, these things would never make sense. With a top speed of 80kts, on four 350Hp engines this thing ain't going anywhere fast, is sucking a lot of fuel doing it. With a payload of only 10 tonnes, it would be more efficient to put it on a truck, and it would get to where it is going faster 75% of the time (there is a 75% chance on any routed flight that winds will be detrimental. IE, you only get a tailwind 25% of the time).
It's called intimidation, Bud. I never blink an eye at signing them. I've never once considered they might have an impact on future employment, and they haven't.
American companies keep doing this to us. I went to the grocery store last week to get some creamer for my coffee. There were probably a dozen brands offering all sorts of flavors. Some were organic. Some were fat reduced or fat free. Some were from happy cows according to the labels, and some were just from the grocery chain.
Fuck all that. Why can't one manufacturer just make what I want! Why do I have to CHOOSE!
The goal is to convince someone of the opposite that you have sexual stamina, not to actually improve it.
Did you see Chancy in their American Gothic piece? I think they were beta testers.
Umm? No. Just no.
My wife, and my ex-wife, both would not put on make-up or dress up if we were going out for lunch or hanging around the house. "Going out with the girls" would send them into hours of preening preparation.
Trying to blame make-up on misogyny is idiotic, and truly makes me wonder if you're actually married.
The article goes to great lengths to say that this went on for years. Why didn't they ask the first guy to show up the simple question, "Why did you think you would find your phone here?" They would say, "Because I used this free IP Adress locating website." Contact the website, and you're off to the races. It might not have gotten resolved until the second or third visit from SWAT, but they'd at least KNOW why it was happening. Having to hire a lawyer and then contact a university professor? Why didn't they just ask the people showing up?
If I go swimming in the ocean, there is enough of a difference between the surface and a few feet down that I can feel the difference.
There is enough seasonal difference that there are actual "water temperature" reports to let vacationers know what it feels like.
These are things that I know of in my everyday life where I have experienced noticeable differences in water temperatures that are in the range of several degrees. These changes are natural and have occurred my entire life (>50 yrs). No one reasonable will contest that.
This study is claiming that a few tenths of a degree difference are destroying ecosystems. Am I a denialist if I ask how can these species easily live through constant fluctuations, and yet are killed off by temperature shifts that are an order of magnitude lower?
Institute policy for good reason. Put it on autopilot and ignore it forever.
Do you see ANYTHING wrong with that algorithm? We have a record amount of cheese because NOBODY wants it. And yet, we're producing more as demand continues to drop. At some point the dairy farmers have to figure out something else to do.
If your job can be replaced by a shell script, you are due for a skills upgrade.
As a SDET, my job is literally to automate people (including myself) out of a job, and that is the goal of most programmers. Just what do people think happened when a secretary was no longer needed to draft a letter, and calculators replaced dozens of engineers computing figures by hand?
I'm wondering if anyone has ever successfully rooted a TV? I doubt these consumer grade devices could possibly have much in the way of security.
And I think there is a surprising amount of evidence to indicate that US "intelligence" agencies do the same with companies in our influence. This is sort of SOP at this point, is it not?
AOC says you are creepy and are trying to catcall her again.
The classes are useful to the people intelligent enough to understand them. Universities are full of people educated far beyond their intelligence.
Gender and Ethnic Studies departments will eventually all close, in the long term because enough new tenured faculty will be hired into the normal Lit and History departments that will hold nuanced enough views that such things become obsolete -- that will be for both good and ill, no doubt, but such is the way of things.
You apparently have not been paying attention to what happens to nuanced views in these universities. Understandable, considering the way most media outlets seem to have an allergy to nuanced views. Suffice it to say, that the only possible reason that you could have for suggesting that a statue of Robert E. Lee ever remain on campus is that you're a racist. There could never be any other possible reason.