Immobile, you say? Never gave that any thought!!! Hmmmm, my guess is
that it'll never catch on.
Larry Dickstein
bugide@juno.com
There is no problem that cannot be solved
with either a checkbook or high explosives.
On Fri, 21 Nov 97 12:40:51 -0500 Larry Macy
<macy@bblmail.psycha.upenn.edu> writes:
>As, however, we spend most of the time "topless" the resulting
>injuries
>in top on spinning are irrelevant. The best way we havce found to
>offset
>the size diff is to utilize the bonnet as an effective support.
>However
>this is predicated on the MG in question being immobile and therefore
>does no effect the lateral motion at high speeds.
>
>Larry Macy
>78 Midget
>
>>Correct you are, Bob, although probably not in a Midget, unless the
>doors
>>were open for the intertial lateral stability supplied by the
>extended
>>mass. If the top were down, the vertical stability of the smaller
>mass
>>would be aided, especially in light of the structural supports
>provided
>>by the windscreen frame and headrests. Conversely, if the top were
>in
>>the up position, then all sorts of imbalances could occur, especially
>as
>>the speed increased. It would then be likely that some sort of
>analomy
>>would occur, necessitating another try, probably in a different
>venue.
>>That is unless the first occurrence ended in a catastrophic event,
>such
>>as might occur when the smaller mass is thrown away from all vertical
>and
>>horitzontal supports. This usually happens only after sustained
>high
>>speeds and, fortunately, is not always obtainable.
>>
>>Larry Dickstein
>>bugide@juno.com
>>
>>There is no problem that cannot be solved
>>with either a checkbook or high explosives.
>>
>>On Fri, 21 Nov 1997 08:56:55 -0600 Robert Allen <boballen@sky.net>
>>writes:
>>>I daydreamed through most of my science classes but I seemed to
>>>remember a concept where, if you could mount the smaller unit from a
>>central pivot point and then spin it around on this new axis, the
>>gyroscopic effect could have a profound impact on the larger mass.
>
|