Immobile, you say? Never gave that any thought!!! Hmmmm, my guess is
that it'll never catch on.
There is no problem that cannot be solved
with either a checkbook or high explosives.
On Fri, 21 Nov 97 12:40:51 -0500 Larry Macy
>As, however, we spend most of the time "topless" the resulting
>in top on spinning are irrelevant. The best way we havce found to
>the size diff is to utilize the bonnet as an effective support.
>this is predicated on the MG in question being immobile and therefore
>does no effect the lateral motion at high speeds.
>>Correct you are, Bob, although probably not in a Midget, unless the
>>were open for the intertial lateral stability supplied by the
>>mass. If the top were down, the vertical stability of the smaller
>>would be aided, especially in light of the structural supports
>>by the windscreen frame and headrests. Conversely, if the top were
>>the up position, then all sorts of imbalances could occur, especially
>>the speed increased. It would then be likely that some sort of
>>would occur, necessitating another try, probably in a different
>>That is unless the first occurrence ended in a catastrophic event,
>>as might occur when the smaller mass is thrown away from all vertical
>>horitzontal supports. This usually happens only after sustained
>>speeds and, fortunately, is not always obtainable.
>>There is no problem that cannot be solved
>>with either a checkbook or high explosives.
>>On Fri, 21 Nov 1997 08:56:55 -0600 Robert Allen <email@example.com>
>>>I daydreamed through most of my science classes but I seemed to
>>>remember a concept where, if you could mount the smaller unit from a
>>central pivot point and then spin it around on this new axis, the
>>gyroscopic effect could have a profound impact on the larger mass.