3 ms·
That's not a citation, it's a random factoid, which doesn't make for a fruitful discussion. Other random factoids include: * trains are long * trains travel s
by titzer 6y ago
That's not a citation, it's a random factoid, which doesn't make for a fruitful discussion. Other random factoids include:
* trains are long
* trains travel slower than airplanes, and drag is proportional to the square of speed
* making conclusions solely based drag coefficients from the density of the air is sound reasoning
One of these statements is false. I get that hackernews is just a forum for casual discussion of various technical topics, but overly categorical statements based on a reasoning in a vacuum (no pun in intended) just force the conversation into unproductive threads like this one. I'm kinda sorry I took the bait at this point.
- deepnotderp 6y agoTrains are long, but skin friction drag is real. Traveling slower is a bug, not a feature. If you want to go slower, airplanes can be more efficient as well!
- kerkeslager 6y ago> I get that hackernews is just a forum for casual discussion of various technical topics I hear this sentiment a lot, and I don't understand it. Trying to speak the truth isn't just optional outside formal contexts. There's no situation so casual that I it suddenly becomes appropriate to make up bullshit and present it as facts. That is to say, I agree with your larger point: if nickff wants to make the claim that trains consume more energy than aircraft, he'd better come up with a reasonable source for that information.