Steve
I assume you refer to the air turbulence problem which requires a certain
minimum separation of aircraft obliged to share the same airspace - such as
when landing and taking off - presumably with a bit of a "safety margin",
more a matter of human judgement than science.[1]
I would not dignify anything to do with "fluid dynamics" as *physics* which
my schooling taught me dealt with topics to which some theoretical
explanations can be applied.
True the concept of a body reaching a terminal velocity in a fluid was
covered in school physics[2] but I always felt it was something of a
maverick compared to other topics.
I had this opinion confirmed when I helped a PhD student put together his
thesis involving fluid dynamics many years ago in my pre-IBM existence. It
was all purely empirical.
[1] And must have been a poor judgement in the case of the Minneapolis
bridge. I spent a few weeks one school holiday in my uncle's civil
engineering office - working on a bridge which happens to be near the site
of the London Olympics - so I got to know about "safety margins".
[2] Remember Stokes' law?
Chris Mason
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thompson, Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: Outsourcing loosing steam?
...
However, let me just inject here, I am a pilot. I know that all the
drivel coming from the airlines (and the ATA, their association) is
bunk. The rules of physics will not be denied -- a runway can only
handle so many aircraft per hour. Schedule twice that number, and you
will inject delays.
Regards,
Steve Thompson
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
