Re: AIRPLANE FACTS & PUMPKIN
Gordon,
Thanks for your well thought out input. I'm glad you
found my last post so stimulating and that you still
have a sense of humor after my little ribbing.
I agree with much of what you state in your analysis,
but you are clearly wrong saying the Doucet Effect is
of no consequence. It certainly has managed to push
your buttons and cause you to explode in technical
oratory. (or was that implode.)
Please stop before I split a gut laughing. (Yet
another problem induced by the Doucet Effect.)
The Doucet Effect is alive and well. (and applies to
more than just pumpkins)
diana
--- G Tanner <g1tanner@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Diana,
>
> I'm glad that you did well in Physics... I did too.
> And a little engineering background. ( remember - a
> little knowledge can be a dangerous thing) Just
> because you got an A+ in physic doesn't mean you
> know
> anything about how airplanes are designed or how
> they
> work. Don't insult me by saying "I thought you
> aeronautical engineering types would know this." I
> have a graduate schooling education and 10+ years in
> aircraft design and analysis so I know how they
> work.
> It's my job and I take it very serious because over
> a
> million people fly in planes everyday. Many planes
> that I as part of a big team helped designed and
> analyzed. I wouldn't normally tout my own
> credentials but in this case it is relevant and you
> questioned them. It is obvious that you don't know
> anything about airplane pressurization. Yes Cargo
> holds are pressurized too.
> At sea level there is 14.7 PSI.
> At 10,000ft it is 10.1 PSI.
> At 40,000 ft it is 2.73 PSI.
> See:
> http://www.cleandryair.com/AltitudePressure.htm
>
> "However, modern airplanes are pressurized to
> stabilize
> the internal air pressure in the plane so that the
> passengers don't blow their ear drums and pass out
> at
> 30,000 feet. The cargo areas are also pressurized
> or
> you would hear more than the pumpkins popping down
> in
> the hold."
> "You can safely ship a pumpkin by airplane and not
> worry about the HOT AIR Effect because the air
> pressure in the plane is held almost constant during
> the flight."
>
> Sorry Diana - This is not true !!!! YES modern
> airplanes are pressurized…. But it is a little know
> fact that the pressure is not held constant nor is
> it
> held the same as it was at take off"
>
> At 40,000 ft the pressure inside a 737 is 11.3 PSI.
> And all big jets are similar.
> The difference between sea level and 10,000 ft is
> 4.6
> PSI
> The difference between sea level and a pressured 737
> at 40,000 ft is 3.4 PSI. So I was wrong the
> difference is great from sea level to 10,000 ft.
> But
> they are close and you were talking like 1 PSI is
> all
> it would take to explode (in this case implode) your
> pumpkin. So if you put your pumpkin in a plane and
> ship it some where, which people have done, you will
> be putting a 3.4 PSI pressure differential on your
> pumpkin- this has happened on several occasions and
> no
> spits where reported. And this differential in
> pressure occurs fairly rapidly- with in an hour or
> so.
> So there you have it... a rapid pressure change of
> over 3 PSI !
> figure out for me how hot or cold, or how fast the
> cavity must expand to create a 3 PSI pressure
> differential inside a pumpkin ?
>
> "The Doucet Effect is transitory and any induced
> pressure differential dissipates over time."
> "most of the time the pressure difference is zero"
> ….
> You're starting to agree with me. There is no
> effect.
> You say that this Hot Air effect is transitory and
> dissipates over time- but these pumpkins are thick…
> 6-8-10 inches in wall thickness. This means that any
> heating or cooling of the inside cavity would take
> place very slowly. Like in a big camping cooler.
> And
> the bottom of every pumpkin is in the shade all day
> and is in contact with the ground, which would also
> dampen any heating or cooling effects. Thus
> allowing
> pressure inside would stay the same because the slow
> heating or cooling inside would be equalized before
> it
> had a chance to build. You'd have to heat up or
> cool
> the whole pumpkin up pretty fast to get the air
> inside
> to heat up quickly.
>
> " Think about this a little more."
> Its not the amount of time spent thinking its the
> amount of timethinking correctly that counts. I have
> thought about it all I need to. Enough to know that
> Pumpkins split because they grow faster than they
> can
> hold themselves together. Plain and simple. Not
> because of some air pressure differential, which
> even
> if it were true would have a very small effect
> compared to other factors.
>
> The rapid growth and the hot air theories-
> Rapid growth: the cavity is expanding right ? so
> you
> are creating a vacuum, which would implode the
> pumpkin.
> Hot Air: hot air inside expands right? wanting to
> explode the pumpkin.
>
> So when they grow fast are you suggesting that we
> put
> a electric blanket on and under them to help them
> equalize inside?
> Which one is your again? Both ? but they are two
> separate effects that would in they had any
> significant effect cancel each other out !
>
> Your theory is nice and all - fun to think about...
> but in this case it
> doesn't even solve a problem... it just states why
> you
> think one happens. If you
> want to do something grand... then solve the problem
> !
> In the pumpkin world there have been lots of great
> advances…who was the first person to:
>
> Come up with a fertilizing schedule ?
> Bury vines ?
> Shade their pumpkin with something ?
> Built a shade structure ?
> Support the vine on each side of the stem ?
> Prune their plant ?
> Grow a Christmas tree shape ?
> Put something under their pumpkin ?
> Built a early season greenhouse ?
> Came up with the contest /weigh-off ?
> Built a wind break ?
> Use heating coils ?
> Use a sprinkler system ?
> Use a sprinkler system with a timer ?
> Use soaker hoses ?
> Use a misting system ?
> Spray for insects ?
> Spray for diseases?
>
>
> All of you folks need to step forward so we can name
> these real advances in pumpkin growing after you.
>
> Of course Howard Dill got some credit that he
> deserved
> by coming up with the
> AG in the first place. They are Dill's Atlantic
> Giants right ?... but we have
> even dropped his name from the tittle. So even he
> isn't getting credit for
> doing all that he did.
>
> But since we are playing the game here, here are
> some
> of my theories:
> TEBT- Tanner electric blanket theory
> TSST- Tanner sunscreen skin theory
> TVST- Tanner vasoline skin theory
> TSTST- Tanner scratch the skin theory
> TWBST- Tanner watering barrel system theory. (still
> somewhat of a secret)
> TWBFST- Tanner watering barrel fertilization system
> theory. (even more of a secret)
> TANST- Tanner airplane no split theory- which was
> use
> to disprove the Doucet theory.
> TLIMFFT- Tanner lime, ironite, miracle grow, fish
> fertilizer, fertilizing theory
> TLIMFFWBFST Tanner lime, ironite, miracle grow, fish
> fertilizer, fertilizing theory, watering barrel
> fertilization system theory. (hopefully the biggest
> secret !)
> In the future will you all kindly please refer as
> stated above so that just credit can given.
>
> As for the Doucet effect, you sold selling yourself
> short. What if you come up with an even better
> effect
> next week? Well then the Doucet effect name is
> already taken.
> but if you were more specific like me... then you
> could have 100's or 1000's
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Pumpkin-growing FAQ: http://www.mallorn.com/lists/pumpkins/search.cgi
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE PUMPKINS
