Continued coverage of Britain's exit from the European Union with Zanny Minton Beddoes of The Economist, Tina Brown, and Gerard Baker of The Wall Street Journal.
27. 12. 2015 | Atmosféra strachu a nejistoty je ve společnosti velice silná, je potřeba upravovat mezilidské vztahy a vést dialog, říká kardinál Miloslav Vlk. Prezident republiky Miloš Zeman si podle něj bere práva tam, kde nemá.
Heavy models
are almost always poorly engineered. A well engineered model can still
end up heavy due to poor material and equipment selection or poor building
techniques. Even so, a properly engineered model at least gives you a
fighting chance. A poorly engineered model is usually a lost cause
unless you take it back to the drawing board and redesign the entire model.
Poor engineering usually is due to one or more of the following:
The designer doesn't understand
model aircraft structures and over-designs.
The designer copies poor
engineering concepts of other bad designers or he comes up with all new poor
concepts of his own.
The design is
compromised to ease building at the expense of additional weight.
Poor strength-to-weight
materials are used to decrease costs to the manufacturer. Additional
cheap and heavy material is added to compensate for lack of strength which
in turn adds more weight.
Any model having
lite-plywood fuselage sides is weaker and
heavier than the same model would be if it had properly engineered
balsa
wood
sides. Even if the plywood sides have large cut-outs,
Warren truss fuselage construction is lighter while attaining a higher strength-to-weight ratio.
Builders have become so lazy over the years that any time they discuss a
model having built-up fuselage sides, the kit is called a builder's kit
meaning that the kit is only for "true builders." Call it
what you want, but one fact will never change —lighter models fly better.
If you aren't willing to do
the work to build a lightweight aircraft then don't be surprised when your models
don't fly as well as those built by builders who are willing to
make the effort.
What I can't figure out is how the new generation of 3D models that have
just a handful of
ribs having large cut-outs and a profile fuselage weighs
as much or more
than a "real" airplane that I build that has 20+ ribs in a larger wing.
Actually I do know why and here's a clue. Contest balsa ribs don't
weigh anything. You could put 50 of them in a wing and it wouldn't
make but (at most) an ounce of difference in the finished weight.
The lack of ribs in 3D aircraft is only to give the illusion of
light weight. More ribs make a more durable wing having a more
accurate airfoil. You get all of this at no weight penalty.
To counter this supposedly lightweight wing, the designers take a thick (heavy)
slab of balsa, slap on some plywood (heavier) around the nose and call it a fuselage.
So much for the weight savings of having only 4 ribs in the wing!
And by the way, take a look at the size of the leading edge and spars on
some of these 3D planks. They are much larger and heavier than what is
normally used on more traditional wings. Heavy spars weigh more than
light ribs.
The Spectator Debate: Should Britain leave the EU?
Brexit The Movie
The ITV #Brexit "Debate"- David Cameron & Nigel Farage on the EU Referendum
'Why Cameron wants short EU campaign' – Nigel Farage
Paxman in Brussels: Who Really Rules Us? Documentary 2016
Oliver Healey
Dear All
Re: EU Referendum Rules triggering a 2nd EU Referendum petition
This petition was created at a time (over a month ago) when it was looking unlikely that 'leave' were going to win, with the intention of making it harder for 'remain' to further shackle us to the EU. Due to the result, the petition has been hijacked by the remain campaign. Admittedly, my actions were premature however, my intentions were as stated above. THERE WAS NO GUARANTEE OF A LEAVE VICTORY AT THAT TIME!!! Having said that, if it had not been mine, it would have been orchestrated by someone on the remain campaign. However, since I am associated with the petition and before the press further associate me with it I felt the need to better clarify my position on the issue even if it looks bad. I am it's creator, nothing more! The logistical probability of getting a turnout to be a minimum of 75% and of that, 60% of the vote must be one or the other (leave or remain) is in my opinion next to impossible without a compulsory element to the voting system.
I have been opposed to the bureaucratic and undemocratic nature of the European Union as an institution privately for many years and for all of my political career. I have openly and actively lent my support to both Vote Leave and Grassroots Out campaigns - why would I do this if I wanted to remain in the EU? I am genuinely appalled by the behaviour of some of the remain campaign, how they are conducting themselves post-referendum not just with this petition but generally. The referendum was fairly funded; democratically endorsed, every vote was weighted equally and I believe this was a true reflection of the mood of the country. To my fellow leavers, now doubting their decision please keep the faith, we will be fine just stick with it. I believe what we need to do now for the good of the country; is get behind the will of the British people, unite, issue Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon and move forward, with the process of leaving the European Union.
William Oliver Healey
Creator of EU Referendum Rules triggering a 2nd EU Referendum petition
