Should be possible. You just have to be able to run the Mac/Windows utility, which then communicates with the base station over wifi or ethernet.
I have an older AP extreme and am very pleased with it. I did have one firmware version go somewhat unstable on me, but it is REALLY simple to upgrade or downgrade firmware versions, and it is extremely easy to set up and change most settings. Also more flexible than I expected, but not as flexible as some of the more geeky units out there.
A toddler safe world would indeed be a boring place! Understand risks, and embrace what you think is sensible. I for one have dreamed of going to the Reno Air races, and that dream will not change due to this.
Evidence (photgraphs) suggest that the elevator trim tab broke off. Due to the speed making a nose up moment the plane was fairly probably trimmed pitch down. Elevator tab breaks off = plane pitches violently up, hurting or killing the pilot (imagine an instant, unexpected 9 Gs when you are setting the turboboost setting. BAM face in instrument panel!). The plane then careens up, past vertical, and down again, with the pilot probably incapacitated. The plane is at around 450mph when this occurs. It can travel quite far in a few seconds, and in this case that was,sadly, towards the spectators. Sad, but shit does happen. This is a racing incident, and has always been one of the risks of racing.
My heart goes out to all those who are injured or have lost a loved one.
the issue is that at maximum speed then the trim tab is providing a LOT of force to keep the nose down. When it breaks off the plane will pitch up quite violently. If that sudden, instant pitch up hurts the pilot (too high G force or face slammed into instrument panel) then the plane loses speed going straight up but still carries enough energy to complete the unintentional loop without stalling (the speed is so high that a pitch up condition goes through the vertical) and then goes down under full power with no control. Yes, the elevator is level in that picture. But that picture is taken at one of the points of lowest speed. In that same picture it looks like you can see his helmet slumped near the instrument panel.
Pictures show the elevator trim tab broken off. At those speeds the aircraft needs significant nose down force to stay level, and if the trim tab breaks off then the aircraft will nose up violently (and violently at 4-500 mph is a violent action indeed). It is quite possible that he suddenly hit between 5-9 Gs (my bet is in the higher part of the range) while unprepared. The human body can't do anything in those conditions. Quite different if those forces are expected and you can prepare through breathing and muscle contraction, but he probably got smacked down and possibly slammed his head into the instrument panel (as this was on the straight which is a place for going through and changing settings, the easy and fun part of the race). Broken trim tab: http://external.ak.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQD53IBQjMbO0oqC&w=90&h=90&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.graytvinc.com%2Fimages%2Fplane%2Benlarged.jpg No pilot showing in canopy during dive: http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2011/09/16/us/20110917_RENO-IPAD-4.html
"the notion of a shared responsibility in the collective metropolitan realm is predictably distant."
Hmmmm.... that same notion didn't seem to arise on Wall street or in the banking sector even though they are generally situated in the heart of cities... maybe this pop-psychological link to the community doesn't override all the other factors, like being either a caring person or a sociopath? Jus' sayin'.
I don't think I'm alone in that I want to see the absolute limits of what a human can do. I don't really care about "cheating" (using unconventional or banned methods of gaining an advantage) as I want to see what's possible. The (few) undoped high class sportsmen are going to ruin their bodies as well, this kind of force just does that to the body eventually, but why not open up the regulations? Make an "ultimate" category so that people can stop pretending to not dope. I don't know of any sport without doping, so why pretend?
Give Pistorius hydraulically operated turbolegs and let him use horse steroids, I STILL want to see how fast he goes. Exactly because he goes above what I thought possible. No legs, and competes in running? I'd call that impressive. Competing against people WITH LEGS? Holy crap. Now, get him better legs, i want to see the hundred meters done in 8 seconds!
When the network of paths and tunnels is big enough then that changes a bit. Underpasses are pretty convenient when they don't require you to go down a steep incline and through a piss soaked and dark tunnel. Fortunately, the ones around here are quite nice and convenient AND we have zebra crossings as well. The underpasses just allow me to keep a solid speed on my bike without ever slowing down.
The higher speeds for the roundabouts have to do with a major highway going through/past the city. This is a major road connecting parts of the city as well as connecting the surrounding areas to the city. A major artery, if you will.
The problem with zebra crossings at roundabouts is not the general driving population, nor is it the good drivers who can look and think ahead and stop. It's the few percent of people who are incapable of looking and thinking ahead, and are likely to miscalculate and plow into a stopped vehicle. This is an extra risk when on a curved trajectory (humans suck at multitasking and following curves). So, a good driver stops for you at the zebra crossing at the roundabout, you walk out, and a bozo slams into the back of the stationary car which ends up on top of you (even if the speeds are low).
Zebra crossings next to roundabouts ARE scary. There's no safe way for cars to stop, so you're always at risk of getting a car that stopped bounced onto you by the next driver who can't navigate a curve and look ahead at the same time.
Zebra crossing (quite scary) or tunnels. Where I live (Sweden) we have roundabouts everywhere, very few traffic lights, and pedestrian/bike tunnels everywhere. The result is that being a pedestrian or biker is pretty nice, and driving is great as there are no stoppages. Of course the roundabouts are rather generous in size and allow for entry at just around standard road speed (around 70 km/h or 50 mph) although dropping the speed a little is advisable (down to maybe 50 km/h).
It's a "transform" pedal which changes the car into a robot, you know, in case of invasion. Just be careful, some models compress the passenger compartment in the transformation process so that occupants need to removed with a high pressure hose...
And I do know that the books I found in my own fields are relatively advanced (useful, in any case) and in some cases showing some bleeding edge work which is what is and will be useful to industry in the coming years.
ooooh... you know how profanity. Wow. Impressive. No, mathematics is not my field, I'm limited at statistics and research methodology. Not very cool, sorry. But let us examine this a little.
the original post is: "re any of these actually useful? (Score:1) by larry bagina (561269) Alter Relationship on Saturday June 04, @20:54 (#36338036) Journal Eg, looking for a math book and all I see is shit like "Gender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty""
See that? "re any of this useful" (well, yes, actually. To quite many people) "looking for a math book (unspecified) and all I see is SHIT like "example of a book""
Next time, read the original comment before leaking your profanity into the comments. The whiner who just got access to 4000 science books is ungrateful because he could not find a book that he likes in a specific field of a specific complexity at the moment the system goes live. After browsing through (and possibly even managing to type in the search box) he judges what he finds as shit just because the book he found is not in his own field.
That IS moronic. And he probably does require a dummy's guide. Possibly a Dummy's guide to searching websites, coupled with a Dummy's guide to not being a whining little bitch.
yes I have looked, but not through the math book selection, not my field.
There are quite useful books there in the multiple fields in which I have an interest, including research methodology, research ethics, cognitive neuroscience, and more.
I dunno. I checked it out and there are many books within my fields there. There are books on computer development, interface development, interface analysis, science methods, aeronautics, etc, as well as general books on methodology.
Quite a few developers here on/., and quite a few scientists.
While you are absolutely right that this news may not be exciting to the general public, it seems perfect for a sizable part of slashdot readers.
But seriously, 4000 books on science, most on an advanced level, and this guy whines because he couldn't get his coursebook in basic math. That's called whining.
I use Mac and Linux, my in-laws and some of my contacts use Windows. Give me a client that reliably (well, as reliably as Skype, anyway) works on these platforms (iOS would also be nice, as both I and the missus use that as well) and is simple enough to install and start for my in-laws, my parents, and the others I want to contact. Google chat should work, but is seriously confusing to beginners, and they want a standalone client anyway.
When you can point me to that VOIP client, then I'll consider dumping Skype. Until the, Skype is king.
" So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?"
Well. Because adding an hours travel time for the plane to circle over the destination while the stewardesses figure out which device emits radio waves probably isn't practical. That and they don't want you mucking about with crap like this if something happens, and they want you to hear any announcements that are made.
The problem is that everything is shown as normal until WAY after the time that everything has turned to sh*t. The autopilot is engaged, and the speed sensing goes screwy (probably over the time of a few minutes) with the aircraft correcting for speed and pitch all the time. In a thunderstorm you will always see big changes in power settings and attitude, but the airspeed will be kept relatively stable by the autopilot. When the pitot tube freezes up (or possibly the static ports as well), the airspeed may appear to fall or climb, based on exactly the conditions that are in the tubes/static ports and which part froze over first. If the static ports ice over then altitude sensing also gets quite interesting/fails. The autopilot tries to follow the the set airspeed/altitude, and corrects the pitch and engine settings to compensate. The plane has gotten itself into the beginning of a dangerous attitude, and around that time the computers finally give up and stop giving any sensible information. You have a heavy jet, possibly with engines spooled down, in a high pitch attitude, with no reliable sensors, no feedback to the controls, and in a thunderstorm. Now the pilots have maybe 10 seconds to decode the situation before a massive stall of the wings, and possible inlet stall of the engines in the following violent maneuvers. The plane stalls. Even if the pilots were able to make sense of the situation they had almost no chance of doing anything. The only backup instrument that may possibly be giving useful information is the artificial horizon, but the pilots can't know that; they look to the backup airspeed indicator, altimeter, and climb/descent indicators. All of which are telling lies. They have seconds to judge what is going on, but it requires serious armchair speculation to see what is the correct course of action. They didn't have that luxury.
The above is, of course, a hypothetical armchair strategist's interpretation of the situation. I do have the advantage of having been a commercial pilot, but it is still pure speculation.
It's sad to see that NASA has been reduced to this. A modern recreation of their 1960's glory-day technology. The Russians have Soyuz which is an evolved an mature version of their old tech, tremendously improved over the original, and NASA wants to field something which is pretty much an upgraded Apollo system.
Ask the Russians for the ride up and down, make something cool for deeper space exploration which doesn't need to make the huge trade-offs of aerodynamic braking and stability but rather is optimised for longer times of habitation (i.e. bigger, doesn't require massive heat shields or a cone shaped body).
Slashdot Mirror
Should be possible. You just have to be able to run the Mac/Windows utility, which then communicates with the base station over wifi or ethernet.
I have an older AP extreme and am very pleased with it. I did have one firmware version go somewhat unstable on me, but it is REALLY simple to upgrade or downgrade firmware versions, and it is extremely easy to set up and change most settings. Also more flexible than I expected, but not as flexible as some of the more geeky units out there.
errr.... *I* have that rating. And I'm just a regular shmoe.
But he did have type specific training on those high performance planes. THAT is cool :D
Yup, and NO government guidelines can judge a safe distance in that scenario. Well, a thousand miles away is probably safe. Probably...
Dear sir. Thank you!
A toddler safe world would indeed be a boring place! Understand risks, and embrace what you think is sensible.
I for one have dreamed of going to the Reno Air races, and that dream will not change due to this.
Evidence (photgraphs) suggest that the elevator trim tab broke off. Due to the speed making a nose up moment the plane was fairly probably trimmed pitch down. Elevator tab breaks off = plane pitches violently up, hurting or killing the pilot (imagine an instant, unexpected 9 Gs when you are setting the turboboost setting. BAM face in instrument panel!). The plane then careens up, past vertical, and down again, with the pilot probably incapacitated. The plane is at around 450mph when this occurs. It can travel quite far in a few seconds, and in this case that was,sadly, towards the spectators. Sad, but shit does happen. This is a racing incident, and has always been one of the risks of racing.
My heart goes out to all those who are injured or have lost a loved one.
the issue is that at maximum speed then the trim tab is providing a LOT of force to keep the nose down. When it breaks off the plane will pitch up quite violently. If that sudden, instant pitch up hurts the pilot (too high G force or face slammed into instrument panel) then the plane loses speed going straight up but still carries enough energy to complete the unintentional loop without stalling (the speed is so high that a pitch up condition goes through the vertical) and then goes down under full power with no control.
Yes, the elevator is level in that picture. But that picture is taken at one of the points of lowest speed.
In that same picture it looks like you can see his helmet slumped near the instrument panel.
Pictures show the elevator trim tab broken off. At those speeds the aircraft needs significant nose down force to stay level, and if the trim tab breaks off then the aircraft will nose up violently (and violently at 4-500 mph is a violent action indeed). It is quite possible that he suddenly hit between 5-9 Gs (my bet is in the higher part of the range) while unprepared. The human body can't do anything in those conditions. Quite different if those forces are expected and you can prepare through breathing and muscle contraction, but he probably got smacked down and possibly slammed his head into the instrument panel (as this was on the straight which is a place for going through and changing settings, the easy and fun part of the race).
Broken trim tab:
http://external.ak.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQD53IBQjMbO0oqC&w=90&h=90&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.graytvinc.com%2Fimages%2Fplane%2Benlarged.jpg
No pilot showing in canopy during dive:
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2011/09/16/us/20110917_RENO-IPAD-4.html
"the notion of a shared responsibility in the collective metropolitan realm is predictably distant."
Hmmmm.... that same notion didn't seem to arise on Wall street or in the banking sector even though they are generally situated in the heart of cities... maybe this pop-psychological link to the community doesn't override all the other factors, like being either a caring person or a sociopath? Jus' sayin'.
I don't think I'm alone in that I want to see the absolute limits of what a human can do. I don't really care about "cheating" (using unconventional or banned methods of gaining an advantage) as I want to see what's possible. The (few) undoped high class sportsmen are going to ruin their bodies as well, this kind of force just does that to the body eventually, but why not open up the regulations? Make an "ultimate" category so that people can stop pretending to not dope. I don't know of any sport without doping, so why pretend?
Give Pistorius hydraulically operated turbolegs and let him use horse steroids, I STILL want to see how fast he goes. Exactly because he goes above what I thought possible. No legs, and competes in running? I'd call that impressive. Competing against people WITH LEGS? Holy crap. Now, get him better legs, i want to see the hundred meters done in 8 seconds!
When the network of paths and tunnels is big enough then that changes a bit. Underpasses are pretty convenient when they don't require you to go down a steep incline and through a piss soaked and dark tunnel. Fortunately, the ones around here are quite nice and convenient AND we have zebra crossings as well. The underpasses just allow me to keep a solid speed on my bike without ever slowing down.
The higher speeds for the roundabouts have to do with a major highway going through/past the city. This is a major road connecting parts of the city as well as connecting the surrounding areas to the city. A major artery, if you will.
The problem with zebra crossings at roundabouts is not the general driving population, nor is it the good drivers who can look and think ahead and stop. It's the few percent of people who are incapable of looking and thinking ahead, and are likely to miscalculate and plow into a stopped vehicle. This is an extra risk when on a curved trajectory (humans suck at multitasking and following curves). So, a good driver stops for you at the zebra crossing at the roundabout, you walk out, and a bozo slams into the back of the stationary car which ends up on top of you (even if the speeds are low).
Zebra crossings next to roundabouts ARE scary. There's no safe way for cars to stop, so you're always at risk of getting a car that stopped bounced onto you by the next driver who can't navigate a curve and look ahead at the same time.
What he said!
Roundabouts decrease the number of accidents, but more significantly, they also reduce the severity of accidents.
Zebra crossing (quite scary) or tunnels.
Where I live (Sweden) we have roundabouts everywhere, very few traffic lights, and pedestrian/bike tunnels everywhere. The result is that being a pedestrian or biker is pretty nice, and driving is great as there are no stoppages. Of course the roundabouts are rather generous in size and allow for entry at just around standard road speed (around 70 km/h or 50 mph) although dropping the speed a little is advisable (down to maybe 50 km/h).
It's a "transform" pedal which changes the car into a robot, you know, in case of invasion. Just be careful, some models compress the passenger compartment in the transformation process so that occupants need to removed with a high pressure hose...
And I do know that the books I found in my own fields are relatively advanced (useful, in any case) and in some cases showing some bleeding edge work which is what is and will be useful to industry in the coming years.
ooooh... you know how profanity. Wow. Impressive.
No, mathematics is not my field, I'm limited at statistics and research methodology. Not very cool, sorry. But let us examine this a little.
the original post is:
"re any of these actually useful? (Score:1)
by larry bagina (561269) Alter Relationship on Saturday June 04, @20:54 (#36338036) Journal
Eg, looking for a math book and all I see is shit like "Gender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty""
See that?
"re any of this useful" (well, yes, actually. To quite many people)
"looking for a math book (unspecified) and all I see is SHIT like "example of a book""
Next time, read the original comment before leaking your profanity into the comments. The whiner who just got access to 4000 science books is ungrateful because he could not find a book that he likes in a specific field of a specific complexity at the moment the system goes live. After browsing through (and possibly even managing to type in the search box) he judges what he finds as shit just because the book he found is not in his own field.
That IS moronic. And he probably does require a dummy's guide. Possibly a Dummy's guide to searching websites, coupled with a Dummy's guide to not being a whining little bitch.
yes I have looked, but not through the math book selection, not my field.
There are quite useful books there in the multiple fields in which I have an interest, including research methodology, research ethics, cognitive neuroscience, and more.
I dunno. I checked it out and there are many books within my fields there. There are books on computer development, interface development, interface analysis, science methods, aeronautics, etc, as well as general books on methodology.
Quite a few developers here on /., and quite a few scientists.
While you are absolutely right that this news may not be exciting to the general public, it seems perfect for a sizable part of slashdot readers.
Nope, I looked.
But seriously, 4000 books on science, most on an advanced level, and this guy whines because he couldn't get his coursebook in basic math. That's called whining.
ohhh, poor baby. So they don't have "The Idiots Guide to Mathematics" for you?
I use Mac and Linux, my in-laws and some of my contacts use Windows.
Give me a client that reliably (well, as reliably as Skype, anyway) works on these platforms (iOS would also be nice, as both I and the missus use that as well) and is simple enough to install and start for my in-laws, my parents, and the others I want to contact.
Google chat should work, but is seriously confusing to beginners, and they want a standalone client anyway.
When you can point me to that VOIP client, then I'll consider dumping Skype.
Until the, Skype is king.
" So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?"
Well. Because adding an hours travel time for the plane to circle over the destination while the stewardesses figure out which device emits radio waves probably isn't practical.
That and they don't want you mucking about with crap like this if something happens, and they want you to hear any announcements that are made.
The problem is that everything is shown as normal until WAY after the time that everything has turned to sh*t. The autopilot is engaged, and the speed sensing goes screwy (probably over the time of a few minutes) with the aircraft correcting for speed and pitch all the time. In a thunderstorm you will always see big changes in power settings and attitude, but the airspeed will be kept relatively stable by the autopilot.
When the pitot tube freezes up (or possibly the static ports as well), the airspeed may appear to fall or climb, based on exactly the conditions that are in the tubes/static ports and which part froze over first. If the static ports ice over then altitude sensing also gets quite interesting/fails. The autopilot tries to follow the the set airspeed/altitude, and corrects the pitch and engine settings to compensate. The plane has gotten itself into the beginning of a dangerous attitude, and around that time the computers finally give up and stop giving any sensible information.
You have a heavy jet, possibly with engines spooled down, in a high pitch attitude, with no reliable sensors, no feedback to the controls, and in a thunderstorm. Now the pilots have maybe 10 seconds to decode the situation before a massive stall of the wings, and possible inlet stall of the engines in the following violent maneuvers. The plane stalls.
Even if the pilots were able to make sense of the situation they had almost no chance of doing anything. The only backup instrument that may possibly be giving useful information is the artificial horizon, but the pilots can't know that; they look to the backup airspeed indicator, altimeter, and climb/descent indicators. All of which are telling lies.
They have seconds to judge what is going on, but it requires serious armchair speculation to see what is the correct course of action. They didn't have that luxury.
The above is, of course, a hypothetical armchair strategist's interpretation of the situation. I do have the advantage of having been a commercial pilot, but it is still pure speculation.
It's sad to see that NASA has been reduced to this. A modern recreation of their 1960's glory-day technology. The Russians have Soyuz which is an evolved an mature version of their old tech, tremendously improved over the original, and NASA wants to field something which is pretty much an upgraded Apollo system.
Ask the Russians for the ride up and down, make something cool for deeper space exploration which doesn't need to make the huge trade-offs of aerodynamic braking and stability but rather is optimised for longer times of habitation (i.e. bigger, doesn't require massive heat shields or a cone shaped body).
Bloody bureaucracy killing space exploration :(
Is this 5-10 flying car years? Similar to dog years but in the other direction. 1 flying car year equals 1 normal human lifespan, apparently...