The guy... other than James and Hammond, stopped top gear from getting huge views because he punched the director in the face because his food arrived 'late'.
The only reason the "test train" derailed was because the flange on the wheels didn't line up with the grooves in the pavement at the crossing. They tried to say it was because of the "hunting oscillation". Bullshit.
+ChunkOfNorris Interesting. Would it however be possible that wobbling contributed to the way they expanded, ie much like getting a surface to break at a certain point by scoring a surface in some way, could the wobbling 'scored' in a way the tracks so that when they did expand, they expanded in such a uniform patter (rather than say all outwards)?
This show doesn't have the best production value, but it does do a good job at breaking down the science into laymen terms which is quite inspiring. Although there are other engineering shows, this show strikes a good mix of educational and entertainment value with the top gear host. Spanning only 3 seasons, it's too bad that it didn't get more views.
You know what's sad - the Acela line. The power cars pulling them are capable of 200MPH. The problem is outside the State of Rhode Island there are too many at-grade crossings.
I agree, wow scary. Poland is the single biggest receiver of EU funds, Poland contributes 3.2Bn Euro and receives 14.4Bn Euro. Poor old Holland contributes 3.9Bn Euro and receives 2Bn Euro. It takes the aggregate receipt / contribution of Germany England and Holland to pay the balance of Poland. If i was Poland i would keep quiet and keep smiling.
Im watching it from Poland and I guess we won't have trains like theese in at least 40 years. Right now we use 60s and 70s gear retired from Bulgarian train companies.
It is NOT the S wave of a quake that does the damage. Both P and S waves are short period waves. It is the Lq (Love wave) and Lr (Rayleigh wave), the long period waves that come later and do the damage.
Actually, he's right & you're wrong, centrifugal force is the tendency of an object to move away from the centre of a curve, centripetal force is the force required to KEEP a body in a circular trajectory. Check out the wikipedia article which explains the difference.
+Avilator189 Dampen: make less strong or intense. Dive onto a bed with a spring mattress, and then dive onto concrete. Tell me the springs didn't dampen anything. :).
+Nino K In frictionless, lossless system, a spring and mass will oscillate forever. To bring the system to rest, a damper is required to damp the motion. This is why car suspension systems have more than just springs, the car would bounce up and down for a long time if there were no shock absorbers.
Absolutely right but we don't live in a frictionless, lossless system, and by that reasoning there would be no need to have springs in a suspension or mattress and you could rely on dampeners alone. The spring dampens the motion because of the force it takes to compress it as you know, now the fact that it keeps most of that energy and then expands back is irrelevant in practical application since its already done its job of dampening. Yes we need a dampener to now dampen the spring itself but that doesn't mean the spring hasn't dampened the initial impact (you against gravity in the mattress example) or motion since its obviously increased the time it takes something to slow down (or change direction in this case). The spring dampens the car, the dampener dampens the spring.
+Nino K You seem confused as to the definition of "damping". I'm not saying that it doesn't exist, I'm saying that it's not a spring's job. None of the damping effects you mention are a result of the springs involved. The springs hold weight, and the dampers slow down the springs, there is no shared effect.
Wait, the Hammond train derailed when it hit the concrete crossing because the wheels were not well shaped for that kind of situation. If there was no concrete it wouldn’t have derailed 🤨
The weight/traction section is extremely misleading. It puts for the theory that less weight is bad and more weight is good, which simply isn't so. Less weight is always better. The problem with the truck on the skidpad isn't that there is too little weight, but that the weight is distributed properly. If the truck weighed half as much or if the weight were over the driven wheels, traction would be improved. Neither of these options requires adding weight. The less weight you have, the less traction is required to move it. All other things being equal, less weight is always better.
friction also increases exponentially with the force pushing the surfaces together. As the mass of an object increases, more force is needed to move it, but the force of friction is increased just as much, therefore the total weight of the object is irrelevant
isaac Baer While the friction increases with weight, the friction required for things like turning, accelerating, decelerating, etc. also increase with weight. A heavier vehicle shifts more weight when turning, accelerating, decelerating, etc. That's less weight acting upon the tires to keep the vehicle on the road. Lighter is better, because it minimizes these other forces.
When the Train Thingy with the Wheel Details its wrong its not because the oscillating effect rather then there was a bump in the road when you watch it closely
Nothing to do with monks, all to do with auto design. Two totally different types of springs. Clock springs are so remotely related as to be irrelevant. Spring suspension with shock absorbers... auto tech.
Is centrifugal force really the correct terminology to use with a train derailing? Something just doesn't sound right about it. I would have said lateral but I'm no "scientist". Anyone?
This would be a very interesting 10 minute programme if they cut out the Reality TV-like bits. Feels like I wasted a lot of time watching an elementary physics lesson for people who were born a few minutes ago and still haven't figured out the basic principles of existing in this world.
America committing to high speed rail? Pffff hahahahahaha fat chance, mate. Amtrak's been committed to crushing that one any time it pops up for discussion.
The Amtrak Acela runs up to 150 mph, although there are large sections of track that can't accommodate that speed. And California is going ahead with it's HSR project, despite costing considerably more than the estimates. The problem is that for HSR to be economically viable, it needs a particular set of circumstances. It needs a large number of people travelling relatively short distances between two points (or at a few select stops along the way). In the US, that's really the Northeast corridor and in California between LA and SF. I don't expect cross-country HSR any time in the foreseeable future, simply because the distances in the US are so great. If you rode the Japanese system from it's southern end in Kagoshima to it's northern terminus at Hakodate, it's a little over half the distance from LA to Chicago-and it's still 17+ hours because of the stops. At that speed, LA-Chicago would be about 25 hours, and 36 hours LA-NY
Not much better off? How far up your butt is your head? You mention the ICE as if it's a piece of crap. It's still far and away better than what passes for rail transport here.
And with the low download speeds "enjoyed" by millions, many videos would not be seen. When you have less than 2 Mbps even a 360p video is problematical. I live in Canberra, the national capital of Australia and have never seen more than 3.1 Mbps on an ADSL system. In some rural districts in Australia 3Mbps would be seen as good.
Codenwarra Cove people with slow internet connections can still watch the video. RU-vid creates low quality versions of HD video uploads. Click on that gear icon and you can change the quality. If the video was uploaded in 1080p , you'd still have a 360p option to watch it.
My browser is not out of date. The quality is actually 240p max. I'm just trying to tell the uploader that if they are going to go to the effort of uploading this TV show for hundreds of thousands of people to watch, then at least get the highest quality version before they start uploading.
And I suppose you expect stuff from years ago to be in 720p too? Granted this is a fairly recent documentary series, so a 1080p source should exist as a minimum. But... Frankly there's lots of stuff around that is basically meaningless in HD. upscaling old game consoles to 720p for instance is just that - upscaling. AKA inventing detail that doesn't actually exist. The only benefits to using 720p+ for that is that 50/60 fps is only available on 720p or above, and the bandwidth of say, a 240p stream is so atrocious that it looks awful even compared to 240p source material. (why? because the 240p source material is an uncompressed source, and the 240p youtube video is using so much compression everything looks like mud.)
North Pole and South poles pull and then to go forwards South Pole and South Pole push away put those thing on the train and then track then you have a fast train
I loved this program but this one in particular... There's nothing really space-age. Nothing has been said that I didn't understand already. The damn thing uses concepts familiar to every engineering graduate. Honestly, it looks like your regular, average civil engineer could come up with a plan for a bullet train inside a week. I'm pretty sure I could design one. The only real hard part would probably be securing backing for the project.
It is unfortunate that " baileyscoolcraft " didn't upload these videos using a bit higher degree of quality. 240p is equivalent to a movie made in 1945. This should (as with ANY upload in the 21st Century) use better quality computers (like a $250 from Walmart for Gezzus sake) with simple Hi-Def levels of modern technology. I'm guessing " baileyscoolcraft " is still using Floppy Discs and Windows ME technology.
Its 360p and who cares? It's totally watchable. If you were born in the 80's, you appreciate the fact you can even watch this online, regardless of quality.
Garegin Asatryan Third rail delivers less electricity to the train, this means the train won’t have enough power for it go fast. Over head wires can deliver more power. This is the reason why your house is powered by wires and not by rails.
A third rail could easily carry high voltages and currents but it would be way too dangerous for people and other ground-dwelling pets, and also more prone to (say) branches being blown onto it and tripping out the system. Furthermore, imagine the risk in a derailment: anybody who survived would be cremated should they come into contact with a live rail. And contrary to what others wrote: The reason your house is powered by wires and not by rails is that rails are not flexible enough to be practicable for installation purposes, or for transporting to the site. And there would be no benefit, wires are perfectly capable of carrying the required power.
Puzzling observation is how two of the supposed losers of the second world war, Germany and Japan have the more advanced transport infrastructure of their respective continents. You'd be forgiven for thinking they were the victors judging by the size of the apparent gulf between them and the rest of us.
Like you, I came up with that as my first answer. Realising Homer Simpson probably said it too I believe we are in esteemed company indeed. Anyway...as for destruction most of mainland Europe, the entire Mediterranean, Greece and the Eastern Front are just a few to name. All faced similar degrees of destruction, so why are so many of those I've just listed not basking in similar levels of a high society, with vastly improved living standards, as well as the emergence of foreign investment and their 'Good well paid jobs and modernised industries?' Kinda like a pay-off. You scratch my and I scratch yeah whatever. So why can a country like Germany succeed so visibly in comparison to many of it's other G8 allies who weren't handicapped anything like the losers. Take Germany and The 1919 Treaty of Versailles and the 1921 London Schedule of Payments which required Germany to pay 132 billion gold marks (US$33 billion in 1945!) in reparations to cover civilian war damage. Then just over 25 years later according to the Potsdam conference held between July 17 and August 2, 1945, Germany was to pay the Allies US$23 billion (mainly in the form of heavy machinery and manufacturing plant). 1953 and finally they can begin. I am happy for those people living their lives in these places, they are the lucky few but for most of us life is far from great. I repeat question why You'd be forgiven for thinking Germany and Japan were the victors within their respective WW2 campaigns, compared to how the rest of us are fairing - cos it don't appear right from where I'm standing.
ingusmant -. There is a difference between inventing and building. Clarkson was and still is, an arse hole. We build lots of things in Britain. We have a first class space industry and, as far as engineering goes, we have provided the basis of most countries infrastructure. So don't believe what you are told by racist fat bastards who think they are smart. It makes you look like an idiot sheep.
1st world problems. Oh my how can you bear it. I can barely see the beautiful cinematography and elaborate CGI in this Oscar winning film that rivals Star Wars. AKA, buy the disk yourself.
Ok. What?? Last time I checked, bullet trains didn’t have wheels. Instead, they hovered on electromagnetic plates. Therefore, without the need for momentum, they could instantly go fast and go faster that traditional trains. So, what? Oh yeah, and did I mention what? P.S what? Oh I almost forgot!! What?
Why am I watching this Pratt? He even admits he doesn't understand what he's talking about. When he does talk he emphasises verbs in a very peculiar way about rubbish not found in any basic school science textbook. Didn't he nearly die in an accident and why didn't he?
You tell us why you're watching this pratt [sic]. He's explaining for a non-scientific audience -- popularizing if you will. He has nearly died in several accidents. "Why didn't he'? Are you wondering about safety equipment, or are you regretting the fact that he did not die? If it's the latter, you are a bastard of the first water.
Very irritating program, no doubt the luvvies who made this, with highly intrusive 'music', sound effects and more, think this is wonderful, but if you wanted to find out about bullet trains, try going somewhere else...
It is a 'fictitious' force, which isn't the same as 'not real'. There is no actual force in play, however you can observe reactions that suggest there is.
That is of course true however when you are modelling situations that involve circular motion it is sometimes necessary to include a centrifugal force in order to accurately represent the situation. But seeing as no such force really exists it is labelled 'fictitious'.
Preaching to the converted. I think we're on the same page about it anyway! Centrifugal as a word just means 'away from the centre' so as you say it is pretty much just semantics
That isn't a force, its a continuation of the waters momentum. The water wants to keep travelling in a straight line at a tangent to the circle, however a centripetal (towards the centre) reaction from the bucket stops that from happening. There isn't an actual 'centrifugal' force in that situation.
