RSS Feeds
Letters to the editor
By Design News Staff -- Design News, October 19, 1998
Who's zapping whom?
I just finished reading your "Breaktime" column in the 7/20/98 issue of Design News--the one about the laser device for elimination of road kills. Shame on you guys, it's not even April, much less April 1st!
Jeff Bertrand, Project Manager
Medtronic PS Medical
Goleta, CA
Is this true?
A 0.5 kW portable laser cooking infra-red selected varmints at 50 ft? Where can I buy one? How much do they cost? Do you think there would be any legal implications on misdirected shots to humans? You know, like people lying in the weeds, beside the road in their groundhog "jammies," resting from the long walk through Montana?
Russ Lebo
Design News responds:
We received a huge number of letters and e-mails from readers commenting on the article titled, "Laser Zaps Roadkill Hazards," that appeared on the back page of the 7/20/98 issue. As many wondered, the article was indeed a spoof.
Some readers, in fact, lampooned us back, including one who inquired whether we had heard about a new self-defense device being marketed exclusively to small woodland animals. The handheld unit has a reflecting surface that bounces the laser beam back to the source.
Look for more back-page spoofs exploring the wildly imaginative side of engineering in future issues.
Aircraft revival 'lightens' cost
In regard to the article in the 9/7/98 issue of Design News on light aircraft revival:
It is said that there are three rules to safe flying:
-
Maintain flying speed
-
Maintain flying speed
-
By all means, maintain flying speed
Similarly, there are three rules to reviving the light aircraft industry:
-
Reduce costs
-
Reduce costs
-
By all means, reduce costs
The AGATE approach to reviving the light aircraft industry strains credulity, since precious little of the costs have anything to do with engineering and everything to do with government regulations for "our safety."
Brian W. Rex
Cordant Technologies
Brigham City, UT
Set sail with fuel cells
To say that I found the article on fuel cells (6/22/98 issue) exciting, would be an understatement. And I can think of one particular industry and clientele that would fit requirements for an introduction and low volume production of 15 to 30 hp systems.
Why not try sailing yachts? Here's a clientele that dislikes the "Iron Jenny," an affectionate term for that noisy and fume-spilling mechanical contrivance they use mostly to enter and leave the marina.
Sailors dislike handling gasoline and diesel fuels for fear of spills. And the penalties for causing even small spills are prohibitive.
Question? What are the ramifications of an alcohol spill as opposed to diesel or gasoline? Would it not just evaporate, leaving nothing to harm wildlife? Sounds like a real winner to me.
Maybe Ballard Power Systems should approach someone like Catalina Yachts with a system to offer as an option.
Dan Tindall
Nix on fuel cells
Regarding fuel cells, (6/22/98 issue), the surcharge I pay, of around $0.03 per kW-hour, is too modest a sum not to assume that virtually every EV owner in California and other, similarly power- deregulated states, will opt to receive power not derived from the burning of fossil fuels. Locations where public EV recharging is available will also offer non-CO2 generating power because the same EV drivers will demand it.
And, as you know, even prior to the options made possible by deregulation, Californians enjoyed electrical power plant emissions by state, from coast to coast. It's no coincidence that the two regions where EVs are being adopted most enthusiastically, the West and East Coasts, are also the two regions whose histories of innovation, alternative-energy projects, and heightened public-environmental concern are being reflected in dramatically lower fossil-fuel emissions than other areas of the country.
So, in order for your claim to be accurate, that "…battery-powered electric vehicles generate significant CO2 emissions in the energy-production process," it must apply not only just to the few EV owners who happen to live in one of the high power emissions generating states, but also those EV owners must be unwilling to subscribe to one of the clean energy options which will almost certainly be available to them. (There are 12 states where customer choice options are available now and all but two of the remaining states have similar deregulation plans and customer subscription options in work.)
In other words, your claim is grossly inaccurate.
Your article makes a number of other questionable statements as well. For example, the sidebar on p.88 says PEM fuel cells have a "low operating temperature(&100 C), which allows quick startup." While it may be true that a PEM fuel cell startup is "quick" relative to other, higher-temperature fuel cells, the casual reader may assume that a PEM fuel cell vehicle starts as "quick" as his ICE vehicle, which is definitely not the case.
Startup requirements also lead to some suspicion regarding your claim of "high-power density."
Steve Kent
Downey, CA
Reader needs your help
Do any readers know the status of HiDrive, a high-speed drive technology that was featured on the cover of the 5/23/88 issue of Design News?
The original contact was REM Technologies of Albany, NY. Please reply with any information to Design News reader Thaddeus F. Zlotek
thad.zlotek@dana.com.
No-solution solutions to no-problem problem
You posed the no-problem problem (in issue 17): "How long will it take catsup to flow across Canada?" Answer: It cannot be done.
The amount of catsup it would take (the entire world output for 1,037.84 years) is just too much, and the human cost too great. Consider just some of the catastrophic fallout for a catsup-less society:
Fast-food joints would go out of business. Who would eat a WhopperTM or its equivalent without catsup? And you can forget the french fries with no catsup on hand to cut the grease. Schools would go bankrupt, as menu planners would be forced to serve a real vegetable or fruit in place of catsup. And don't forget Hollywood. How would they make another action, alien, or horror movie without this "artificial blood"?
Adrian Nicholas,
Danville, CA
Actually, your no-problem problem could be solved if you had a large amount of catsup with a traceable isotope in it and you conduct the test between May and July (no snow or ice).
The catsup could be poured into the Red River near Noyes, MN. It would flow north into Lake Winnipeg to Cross Lake and Sipiwesk Lake to Split Lake and then into the Nelson River to Hudson Bay (referencing a map at this point might be useful). The isotope would allow you to detect small amounts of catsup as it enters Hudson Bay.
Michael Singer
San Jose, CA
Send us your letters
Got an opinion on engineering? Want to add information to an article you've read in Design News? Tell us about it.
We welcome your letters. All, of course, are subject to editing for brevity. And, you must sign the letter and tell us your company's name.
Send them to Letters, Design News, 275 Washington St., Newton, MA 02458, or e-mail them to:jmunson@cahners.com
Note: Opinions expressed are those of our readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Design News.
Talkback
DN's Resource Center Get Free Information, Made Easy
-
Understanding a Modular Instrumentation System for Automated Test
National Instruments | White Paper
Request Item -
Advanced Features of High Speed Digital I/O devices : White Paper Series
National Instruments | White Paper
Request Item
