Capricorn

my doberman used to like the front lights off: it allowed him to sneak up behind ppl that made it to the front door. Never growled till he had cut off your exit. He was sneaky like that

RET is clearly expensive.

Which one will impact survivability of F1 racing more: racing politics, or rise of the electric car+global environmentalism? I haven't followed F1 for years now, so it's pretty much habitually off my spectating radar. However, that series: F1: The drive to survive has reminded me of how interesting F1 can be, and this weekend, I loosely followed the both the qualifying and racing via the internet. there's life in them F1 legs, they just need to market is better. That F1 series was a really good start.

not sure if this was posted previously (albeit, i have vague memory that someone may have linked to a NY Times story previously, just can't recall if it's the same one). NY Times In response to that article, I find this response on Ars Technica pretty much on point:

SRAM has released an upgraded version of the Guide, SRAM G2. Apparently, the weight of guides with the stopping power of Codes. edit:not really the same power as codes, only 7% increase in power over current Guides. Codes are still top of the sram brake power pile. Along with the new lever bodies, and calipers, SRAM is releasing a new brakepad compound: Power organic.

i see Radebe is mouthing off about the amount of money and timeline required to fix the power situation: 11 years and R1trillion. R1trillion..... That damn number keeps coming up, and i fear its a mindscrew on the public to "come to their own conclusion" that zuma's nuclear fleet ambitions were are appropriate, almost prophetic. The political ambivalence in charting a more sustainable, greener solution to our future power requirements is turning into political unwillingness. I wonder if Putain is calling in the chits on the nuclear deal So if we have to spend that amount over that period of time, the question for us is: how do we prefer it being spent? The other side of this coin is: what's being done about south africa's industrial base? All this focus on energy alone is pointless without an equal focus on the demand necessary to justify the additional expenditure on generating capacity. The Demand base also just happens to be the answer to our unemployment dilemma. In my view, the whole current political outlook and social debate is polarised to only one aspect.

If the thread fits, it will work, grub or cap screw. Nor does it matter that one end is thread-free. File it off if you are OCD that way. But if the grub screws are cheaper and plentiful, go with that.

What you refer to I understand as battery capability: it can handle short duration, high power draws, as well as continuous substantial power draws afterward. This is the nature of a deep cycle battery, which is perfect for solar power applications. Coupled to charge controller appropriate for the battery, it will do just fine in a domestic application. But i fear the costs simply because of it's robust design.

I find that curious as well. Unless those batteries require contact with sea water to function properly, i don't understand why it cannot be used as normal batteries. what about their operating environment makes their use so specific? Without more detailed info, i call bollocks.

charge controller makes the PV panels effectively open circuit. It's like a switch that's open: there's a voltage difference across the terminals of the switch,but no current flows, so hence no power is being built up. It's perfectly safe as there's no charge build up in the panels that is, it's not like a dam that can overflow. It needs a completed circuit to generate power (current to flow). Perhaps in that scenario, you will need more batteries, or another useful load to help get better return on your investment?

Grand Prix Driver is the Mclaren specific one. Now that i think of it, it could very well be the show upon which F1: Drive to survive was modelled, and not really that much more technical in nature.

What does your company's conditions of service say? i'd imagine there's no clause that explicitly defines altered working hours given load shedding. If the proposal goes against the labour act, then you'll need approval from the DoL. At least that's what happens at the place i worked.

noooooooooooo!!! dammit. must catchup! love that show.

apparently, season 2 got a green light with Ferrari indicating they were interested in joining the party. In season 1, Merc was sandbagging Ferrari and vice verse, hence their conspicuous absence, both citing possible 'distraction' from the larger, more intimate presence of cameras and mics. Can't wait to hear their unfiltered thoughts on other drivers. Mclaren's love of skewering Grosjean was abit ouch to listen to.

crossed the season 1 finish line: really really riveting series. While i personally preferred the more technical nature of the Mclaren series a few years back, this was genuinely interesting and enjoyable.

in my view, you can locate it almost anywhere you want with no major reduction in strength because of the shear strength provided by the outter melamine layers. It makes those crappy particle/chip boards quite strong. But don't put it too close to the supports, perhaps more along the side that is unsupported. That area is lightly loaded to begin with.

wait till you see what's cooking around the reactors. It should not be a consolation that national and international regulations are so tough. The crap that's become the pervasive destroyer of once great public institutions, is destroying the soul of that place.

i've become a big fan of NZs prime minister. She bats hard for all her people. Yes, one cannot forget she is afterall, a politician, but so far, i'm loving what i'm seeing.

what is with Haas, the Aussie GP and left side wheel changes. Drivers must be scared out of their little pips at the thought of having to pit.

https://mobile.twitter.com/trevorsumner/status/1106934369158078470 Very interesting summary of the situation and the potential root cause

the automatic pitch control introduced via the MCAS to counter the additional pitching generated by the new nacelle design, and the initial lack of awareness therefore by the pilots poses two potentially mutually exclusive, but likely co-dependent possibilities, as cause for the crashes: the MCAS solution creates it's own instabilities. The fact that boeing is busy with an FAA mandated change to the control system software hints very strongly at this. Also Boeing will be including input from the second AOA sensor to counter problems induced by a single faulty AOA sensor. This feels like a bizarre lack of redundancy of a critical input.the pilots are still not hunkydory with MCAS and its behaviour, leading to outdated recovery actions when the doodle hits the fan. tThe statement in the article that "both planes fly the same as long as no faults appear",and the fact that the plane was advertised as compatible with flight training for NG versions leads me to believe there's possible delays in ensuring MAX pilots receive proper training regarding the behaviour of MCAS and how they need to respond in event of a major issue. Clearly, highly experienced pilots at the helm did not avert the disasters, and might actually be the cause of it: they did what came instinctively. Repeated training is the basis for instinct.

apparently, the discovery at the crash site that convinced the FAA to reverse their world-beating decision, and that caused Boeing to discovery an abundance of caution, was that the jack-screw was found to be set in the nose-down position. Is the jackscrew seems to actuate the horizontal tail, which pitches the nose up or down. Perhaps it's rearward location is what caused it to remain as tangible evidence despite the catastrophic nature of the crash.

cockpit....

$100 MILLION! would love to hear the actuary explain a non-fatal hull-loss would affect reputation or insurance costs to the tune of more than $100 million... hmm.. insurance costs...

Boeing's bucking broncos