land-speed
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Land-speed] British Steam effort 139.843mph

To: Wester Potter <wester6935@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Land-speed] British Steam effort 139.843mph
From: Jon Wennerberg <jonwennerberg@nancyandjon.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 11:32:38 -0400
On Sep 2, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Wester Potter wrote:

> It's obvious you have not worked timing on the salt.  We put down  
> those miles of wire for a reason, dependability!  We use a computer  
> program that limits numbers to the right of the decimal because you  
> can't use more than three numbers for your speed.  Our computer  
> gives additional possibilities but YOU don't need them.  We remember  
> the times when radio contact is impossible because of atmospheric  
> conditions on the salt.  Ask GMC about the year they ran the pickup  
> truck with Don Stringfellow Sr. driving.  They had a chase van  
> positioned parallel to the truck that could relay telemetry to the  
> motorhome (they gave it to us several years later) that had radip  
> connections to the GM proving ground computers.  It worked part of  
> the time.  Do you want part of the speeds?  We certify the computers  
> every year  by third party comparison with the atomic clock in  
> Colorado.  We use a wireless link between the computer and receiving  
> units across the course for time slips and at the start for the  
> radio announcer ... but we put a wire across to the time slips in  
> case the salt gremlins poke their ugly heads up which they  
> occasionally have a tendency to do.  The other, reliable, high tech   
> possibilities would boost your entry fees considerably because they  
> are expen$$$$$ive.  That and dead on dependability and reliability  
> is why we don't use them.
>
> Wes


Wes, it's obvious that you don't want to allow experimentation or you  
wouldn't be telling us about what didn't work in the past.  I allow  
that maybe the system now in use works -- but I respectfully suggest  
that if nobody tries to improve with new technology -- nobody will  
ever get any better system.  Your comments about prior attempts at new  
technology hold some important words -- "...several years later..."  
that tell us the technology is not the latest available today in  
September 2009.  Experimenting is not cheap -- but notice that I have  
not ever stated anything about how useable the system I'm dreaming  
about is right at this instant.  If someone doesn't try to move  
technology forward -- we're doomed to live in the past.

Jon
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net  http://www.team.net/donate.html

Land-speed mailing list


http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/land-speed

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>