Looks like the same shorts too - hope they had a wash in between 
Itās one of my holibobs shirts. Loppers was a mini holibob.
2 Likes
You have dedicated holidaying shirts?
Different shorts. The new ones are a fetching urban camo pattern.
Donāt you?
Naturellement.
No, I mostly have a motley collection of rag tag clothes that I try and jam into some sort of receptacle.
1 Like
How can they be rag tag - you must have bought a complete new wardrobe in the last year with the weight youāve shifted? 
You need a nice Hawaiian shirt 
Now thereās an oxymoron if ever I heard one.
2 Likes
It distracts attention from the face, which lets face it, you could do with.
1 Like
in my quest for a definition of the word hollibob I came a across this.
1 Like
Need to build one of theseā¦
Iām not sure about that. If you fancy having it just because it āisā a NASA Rover then yes, thatās exactly what you need. But quite a few of the factors which drove it to be the way it is donāt really apply down here. From a hardware point of view it had to be i) light, ii) suited to a thin but sometimes dusty atmosphere, iii) suited to much less gravity than here, iv) suited to a much lower average temperature with a much larger diurnal range, v) capable of surviving a drop from a great height, albeit in lower gravity (the last one was crane-landed though, I think), vi) very unlikely to fail, even if that meant accepting limits on what it could do, vii) still capable of doing quite a lot even if some bits of it did fail. It also didnāt need to concern itself at all with being rained on or corroding in a damp atmosphere.
VB
Thatās a very big dildo.
1 Like
1 Like
I notice they used the slightly slower Boeing rather than the Astra.
1 Like
Christ, can you imagine the computational horsepower that would require? Would probably require an actual Astra engine attached to a turbine to generate enough energy to just power the modelling system.
Modelling sytems which are prone to turbulence tends to be extremely computationally demanding. Itās hard to imagine a system more prone to turbulence than the airflow behind aircraft landing gear. I was surprised to read, in the NASA paper which the video is linked to, that the undercarriage is the major source of airframe noise (as opposed to engine noise, I guess) during take-off and landing. So the properties of that flow actually matter in the real world.
Somewhat more abstract is the issue of how a heavier fluid e.g. water might āfallā into a lighter one e.g. oil if we could somehow arrange to start with the heavier fluid on top and the boundary between them shaped in some (mathematically) simple way. Hereās what the computer says will happen for a light (white) fluid with a heavy (black) one on top
VB
I just think itās kind of fun. No need to over analyse.