Ever have a really far out question, one that you can’t ask anyone else for fear of embarrassment? Well, here’s the page.
Rules: One question at a time, if you can answer apersons question, you can ask the next one. I’ll start us off.
Why does the P-51 have a wood floor?
I would assume it’s 'cause wood was cheap, in less demand, light and did the job
I don’t know if that can be considered answered, fell free to add to that, but I was thinking of something the other day and this seems like a good exuse to ask; the British navigaton aid, the Gee box, is that pronounce gEE like gee wize I wish I knew how to pronouce that, or gee like hockey player Guy Lafleur? (sorry, I think I spelt his name wrong)
it’s light, it’s a non-strategic material, it’s easy to fabricate and install and it’s strong in that application. Lots of planes have wood floorboards. To get that strength with aluminum you’d have to do a corragation of some type, or have lots of stiffeners. Many more parts and time to build.
When the Allison engined P-51 was built the top of the wing was the floor. When they installed the Merlin engine they had to make the fuselage taller. Which caused the seat to be raised in order to see out, so they also had to raise the floor. Wood was the easiest, simplist way to do this. Also the floor was made out of plywood and painted not the stained mahogony you see on many models and warbirds.
As you guessed “Gee” is pronounced just like the letter “G,” if you’re running through the alphabet, or like “jeer,” without the “r.”
Edgar
Black? I’ve got an office floor I tried to simulate wood on, and am really unhappy with the way it came out, so if they were painted, that’s a huge relief as I can easily fix what I didn’t like!
Hi guys
GEE, capitalised as a CODE word, pronounced as above letter “G”, was early British Navigational Aid, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEE_(navigation) for all you ever needed to know…
including the fact that it’s ‘cover story’ was called “Jay” to confuse the germans…
pics at http://www.duxfordradiosociety.org/restoration/restoredequip/r1355/r1355.html
enjoy
Jon UK
Most British items had code words, that, deliberately, had nothing to do with the subject, since the scientists had worked out that the Germans often gave a clue, in the given name, e.g. Freya was a one-eyed goddess, so the radar was a single beam. When “window” was to be used, the discussion was held in an ordinary room, and the man, looking around it, for inspiration, looked at the window, and used it as the code-name. “H2S” is an absolute cracker; it has nothing, whatsoever, to do with Hydrogen Disulphide, but, as you may have found out, at school, H2S smells awful. When they were trying to think of a codename, someone remembered a reaction, by their rather excitable boss, when he said that something “Stinks! That absolutely stinks!” It nearly rebounded on them, though, since their boss asked how they’d hit on that codeword, and someone, at the back, just in time, said that it stood for “Home, Sweet, Home.”
Edgar
In the same state of mind, it seems that the TWAIN standard for communication between computers and scanners means Technology Without An Interesting Name
Or QDOS on your old computer – Quick and Dirty Operating System
Ok, for the next question:
If ALL atoms are made of the same materials (neutrons, protons, electrons, etc.), and those materials are SUPPOSEDLY the same (just different amounts & combinations of them give us our different atoms), then why can I see through glass and not metal? I’ve asked many physicists this (I work in the medical electronics field, so I get to talk to a lot of physicists), and they can’t explain it.
Wouldn’t it be the different amounts and combinations that create properties of a substance? Those properties are what make glass glass and metal metal.
Not to be confused with the multi-tasking operating system of the Sinclair QL released in 1984.
That’s true, BUT, if I can see through glass (it’s atoms are made of the same materials that iron’s atoms are made of), I should be able to see through iron. Both are very stiff, although glass is very brittle, whereas iron is not. The atomic structure of each is the same, which is a nucleus of neutrons and protons, with electrons filling in the energy shells surrounding the nucleus. The energy shells are supposedly the same distance apart in all atoms, so crowding of electrons isn’t the answer (at least, not in my mind). There are different amounts of electrons in the shells, though, so maybe that’s one possible answer…
No, wait, that’s not it. Different metals have vastly different amounts of electrons, but I can’t see through any of them. Glass’s atoms have a lot of electrons, like some metals, and I can see through it.
Wow. Talk about a nerdy question, huh? This is something that I’ve wondered for years.
I suppose it all depends on which frequency of light you choose to look with. Xrays are condidered part of the light spectrum and can be used to see through many materials we cant see through just using our eyes.
As I understand it, (and this argument is strictly for solids) transparency is a quantum quality manifested by what the electrons in the atom do when presented with a photon. Electromagnetic energy (of which visible light is a part) is composed of photons, and photons pack specific energies based on their frequency. Electrons can only accept certain frequencies depending on their ground state and available valence energy levels. For crystalline material, its also about how the electron is bound up in the matrix of a crystal lattice. If the electrons can neither absorb, reflect nor deflect a photon, the photon will pass through the material unaffected, or only slightly affected. In a perfect matrix, an electron cannot alter its energy state without breaking free of the lattice, and so cannot easily absorb a photon. In a different vein, it is also theroerically possible that a photon absorbed in a lattice will cause the release an identical photon with an identical vector (however, until we can plant ID tags on individual photons, we will be unable to definitively prove or disprove this theory).
In metals, the electron bonds are a bit less rigid, allowing photon absorbtion and deflection, thus metals are opaque (at least to the frequencies of visible light).
I have yet to read of a theory explaining the transparency of liquids. So, why is water clear?
Phil
HOLY COW, Phil!! You must be a physicist! Great analysis! It all comes down to FM theory - freakin’ magic!! Until a way is actually created to see atoms (and thus prove that they do, indeed, exist), we can only guess at it.
By the way, have you heard of the new theory being considered for electronics? It’s called “Groundhog Theory”. It goes like this -
Let’s say you’ve been working many hours on repairing an eletronic thingy. You’re now ready to apply power to it once again. So, you turn your back to it (facing the wall) and flip the power switch on. If you see your shadow, you’ve got six more weeks of repairs to do. [8-] [:D]
[(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D]
“Visible light,” the part of the electromagnetic spectrum that our eyes use, is just a small part of the spectrum. The spectrum also includes radio waves, infrared, ultraviolet, X-rays and gamma rays.
If the electromagnetic spectrum was a piano keyboard, “visible light” would be just the middle half-dozen or so keys. Infrared and radio waves would be toward the left end of the piano, while ultraviolet, X-rays and gamma rays would be toward the right.
The different frequencies have different characteristics. An example: Visible light can’t pass through walls, which is why we can’t see through them. Radio waves can easily pass through walls, though. Otherwise, you wouldn’t be able to listen to the radio indoors.
I have no answers…however I do have a question that has occupied the minds of model builders for many years.[%-)]
Ahem!!..Here goes.
Why is it that crumbs on a carpet stand out to the naked eye yet small plastic model parts do not? Is there really a carpet monster that eats them? Or do domestic carpets have a anti-crumb defection field that prevents them from being sucked into the fibres.[%-)]
That one has been driving me crazy for years…[:-,]