All Forum Comments
Can you connect the iPhone to the K7?
Comment by Anvh posted on iPhone/iTouch Apps at 16/04/2010 - 08:41
I thought we were attempting to made to the 100pages.
Comment by Anvh posted on Another pointless thread at 16/04/2010 - 08:34
Sorry for going so far off topic
Comment by Anvh posted on Another pointless thread at 16/04/2010 - 00:29
Pentaxophile wrote:
The received wisdom is that rail travel is less oil-greedy, and I can't see any reason to doubt that moving from long haul holiday flights to more local holiday destinations reached by train or car, and moving from short haul business flights to rail journeys, would reduce energy consumption and emissions quite a bit.
Yes you're truly right there but if you plan to go to somewhere not in west Europe a plain might be better, more direct routes and all those things and it saves you time.The received wisdom is that rail travel is less oil-greedy, and I can't see any reason to doubt that moving from long haul holiday flights to more local holiday destinations reached by train or car, and moving from short haul business flights to rail journeys, would reduce energy consumption and emissions quite a bit.
If you have some basic physics you know that if you want to have something goes twice as fast you need four times more energy and if you then compare that a plane flies 4 times as fast but use only 2,4 times more fuel, it's quite an achievement.
Comment by Anvh posted on Another pointless thread at 16/04/2010 - 00:23
Pentaxophile wrote:
Per person, per km, at normal intercity operating speeds?
An airplane can't fly efficient at those speeds, they are build to be efficient you talk about these numbers.Per person, per km, at normal intercity operating speeds?
747-400 consuming around 2,6 litre of fuel per passenger for 100km depending on many other factors of course at cruise so that's around 900km/h at 1400km.
For trains 0,35 MJ/passenger-km and how fast do they go 140km/h?
Jet fuel kerosene is around 37,6 MJ/l so that multiplied by 2,6 litre and divided by 100km is 0,9776 MJ/passenger-km but he does bring you there 4 times faster but with 2,5 times more fuel.
It depends on what you call efficient.
A car does around 5,5 litre per 100km if you got a good car, that's around 1,914 MJ/km. If you are alone in a car it isn't efficient at all but with 4 persons it becomes reasonable.
Comment by Anvh posted on Another pointless thread at 16/04/2010 - 00:21
Pentaxophile wrote:
Have there been any studies showing planes more fuel efficient than trains, Stefan?
It depends on how you calculate that, per kg cargo, per passenger and is speed important?Have there been any studies showing planes more fuel efficient than trains, Stefan?
Comment by Anvh posted on Another pointless thread at 15/04/2010 - 23:50
Oggy wrote:
Jet engines may be relatively efficient, but they still burn a large amount of fuel and it is released straight into the middle of the atmosphere where there is nothing to absorb any of the exhaust gasses, so aircraft are a major pollution generator.
Have there been studies about this?Jet engines may be relatively efficient, but they still burn a large amount of fuel and it is released straight into the middle of the atmosphere where there is nothing to absorb any of the exhaust gasses, so aircraft are a major pollution generator.
I also know that tires are quite polluting as well.
Comment by Anvh posted on Another pointless thread at 15/04/2010 - 23:19
Do we do daylight saving or else for me GMT is GMT, it's at least clearer for everyone in the world?
Comment by Anvh posted on Fortnightly Competition Rules at 15/04/2010 - 22:57
cedricd wrote:
Nature 1 aviation 0, great shame for folk needing to return from abroad. Looking positively though the drop in CO2 and other naughty stuff from jet engines from just a 24 hour stoppage must be huge.
Flying is one of the most efficient form of travelling so if they use an alternative it would not be good Nature 1 aviation 0, great shame for folk needing to return from abroad. Looking positively though the drop in CO2 and other naughty stuff from jet engines from just a 24 hour stoppage must be huge.
Comment by Anvh posted on Another pointless thread at 15/04/2010 - 21:07
CheekyChappy wrote:
I have had a good look at the camera and manual but there does not seem to be a way to cancel the inbuilt flash when used in conjuntion with a wireless flash. If anyone figures out a way to do this on the K-x, can you please let me know. Thanks!
No you can't cancel it but you could set it as controller and then the build-in flash would just flash enough to trigger the other flash so hardly contribute to the photo.I have had a good look at the camera and manual but there does not seem to be a way to cancel the inbuilt flash when used in conjuntion with a wireless flash. If anyone figures out a way to do this on the K-x, can you please let me know. Thanks!
Custom Menu > page 3 > 17. Flash in Wireless Mode
Comment by Anvh posted on Suggested Flashguns for K-x at 15/04/2010 - 20:55
