AOPA's goofy claims about R/STOL

denverpilot

denverpilot

Tied Down
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
55,469
Location
Denver, CO
Display Name
Display name:
DenverPilot
AOPA ran out of time to put the Robertson STOL kit on their "Crossover Classic" sweepstakes aircraft. I have no problem with that.

What I do have a problem with is their other comment that R/STOL "uses aerodynamic devices of varying complexities" to accomplish the job. Makes it sound like it's some crazy combination of devices.

Last time I looked, all the R/STOL on my Cessna 182 did was add the bellcranks to interconnect the ailerons with the flaps, and droop the ailerons. There's also two stall fences on top of the wing.

I wouldn't put that under "complex aerodynamic devices" in my head. My iPad is thousands of orders of magnitude more "complex" than that.

It feels like the author was just digging for more excuses than just saying, "We don't have time," to me.
 
denverpilot said:
My iPad is thousands of orders of magnitude more "complex" than that.
Click to expand...

OK, the grammar thread is elsewhere, and I acknowledge that the iPad is a wonder of complexity, but thousands of orders of magnitude...

So your iPad is 102000 (1 with 2,000 zeros after it) times more complex?
 
denverpilot said:
Yes. I'm counting each transistor. ;)
Click to expand...

So...

With 32nm gates (Current Intel i7), that means you can fit (aggressively) 1015 transistors per m2.

So, you're theoretical iPat would be 101985m2. That 6.67 * 101973 times the land areas of the Earth.:hairraise:
 
JeffDG said:
So...

With 32nm gates (Current Intel i7), that means you can fit (aggressively) 1015 transistors per m2.

So, you're theoretical iPat would be 101985m2. That 6.67 * 101973 times the land areas of the Earth.:hairraise:
Click to expand...


Those Apple guys never cease to amaze me!
 
JeffDG said:
OK, the grammar thread is elsewhere, and I acknowledge that the iPad is a wonder of complexity, but thousands of orders of magnitude...

So your iPad is 10^2000 (1 with 2,000 zeros after it) times more complex?
Click to expand...

I'd vote for the 1000s of times and not the exponential version. Or, if you do prefer the thousands of times, then n * 10^3 where n is some arbitrary number.
 
gismo said:
I don't think you'd get to 10^2000 if you counted all the atoms.
Click to expand...

Well, the mass of an iPad is 680g...

So to keep it simple, that would give us 674.62 mol of protons and neutrons, or 4.06 * 1026 nuclear particles. Each proton and neutron consists of 3 quarks, so now we're at 1.2 * 1027. Add in about half the number of protons/neutrons for electrons, and you get 1.4*1027 elementary particles in an iPad.

You would need 8.3 * 101972 iPads to have 102000 elementary particles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top