Johnny .45

My girlfriend went shopping a few days ago and got a box a trash bags. Without looking at the box, I took the roll of bags out and threw the box away. I just took the first bag off the roll, and I find that it's like backwards to a normal trash bag: it's much shorter in height than width. Maybe 2 feet high by 3 feet wide, with a drawstring. Basically, it's the size of a typical kitchen trash bag, but with the opening on the side of the bag instead. No way it's going to fit any normal trash can that I've ever seen. What is the point of this? She swears she grabbed normal trash bags (I'm dubious), but they obviously aren't meant for normal trash cans.

I read the first book months ago. I just started the second one, and there is this "mudmen" boy and girl who come to Winterfell to meet Bran. I have this vague memory of some character going into the marshes to meet the "Marsh King", only he finds out that she is actually a young girl. He ends up spending the night with her; I remember it talking about how she smelled of mud and sweat, but he found it a pleasing smell as he was lying next to her. Is this in the first book, and is this the same girl who comes to meet Bran in the second? I can't find anything about it by Googling, but I swear I remember reading this somewhere.

I've been reading a bit about Wankel engines the last few days, and I got into an debate with a guy online over it. He said that a rotary engine gets 3 power strokes per rev, which is true is you're looking at the rotor. But the crankshaft (actually, the "eccentric shaft) of a rotary spins THREE times per every turn of the rotor, which means that measuring at the output shaft (like in a normal engine) you get ONE power stroke per turn of the crank. Does anyone know if the tachometer sensor represtents the crankshaft or the rotor rpm? I mean, if your tach in an RX-7 says 3,000rpm, is that 3,000rpm of the crank (and 1,000rpm for the rotor), or is it 3,000rpm of the rotor (and 9,000rpm for the crank)? I suspect I'm right and it comes from the crank, just like a piston engine.

We recently purchased (for too much!) an '05 Honda Civic 4-door with a D17A2 SOHC VTEC 4-banger (and a stick, of course!). Aside from shot bushings and poor rear brakes, it's been having some weird issuers with the cooling system. First sign was when I took it on a 70mph 10-mile run to see how it was at high speeds. I had it revved up over 3000rpm the whole way, reaching toward redline a few times (it's a windy road). I cruised the last few miles home at 30-35mph, to keep the air flowing over the radiator. The temp gauge was showing normal this whole time. I drove back into town, only to realize a few minutes later that the temp gauge was buried in the red!. I popped the hood, and there was radiator fluid all over the place. I limped the 1/4 mile home, and that was that. I topped it off. Since then, it's overheated randomly at least 5 times in 2000mi or so, and blown radiator fluid at least twice. These were during normal driving, not beating on it (I wasn't the one driving when it happened!). Any ideas on what this could be? Whatever it is, it seems to work fine 95% of the time, right in the middle of the gauge, but now and then it'll suddenly peg the temp gauge for no obvious reason. One other thing I've noticed is that the heater is VERY slow to heat up, and it doesn't seem to be consistent...sometimes it'll start blowing hot air within ten minutes (from cold/-32degF), other times 20 minutes later it's still blowing cool air. Related, perhaps? The first thing that most people think of is the thermostat, but it doesn't seem like what a bad thermostat would do. I mean, isn't a thermostat either good or bad? If the thermostat was bad, it'd either overheat every time from lack of coolant flow. Do you think maybe it's stuck OPEN, or someone removed it? I've heard of such things before. =/

I keep getting dozens of spam "connection requests" from made up accounts advertising "sexy photos". Some days there's a couple, other days there are s couple dozen, and I have to "deny" them all, or it gets worse. Isn't there some way to set it so people can't even ask me to connect? I can "block" each one, but it takes forever, and there are just new ones next time. I don't really want to make a new account; I've had this one for a long time.

Just love how on the window where you click "deny", it says that it's "protected by SpamGuard"...it's like "thanks, thanks a lot. You're a big help..."

My sister has a 1994 Geo Tracker 4WD 5-speed. For some reason, the passenger side locking hub tends to stcik in the "free" position. She carries around pliers to help unlock it, but even so it can be a real bear to get it locked (or to get it "un-free", anyway), even for me. She supposedly had the guy at her garage "lubricate" them recently, but a couple of days ago, she had to drive 150 miles in a snowstorm in 2WD because she couldn't lock her passenger-side hub. I tried it myself earlier, and even with the pliers it took a lot of elbow grease and a few choice words to get it out of the "free" position.

Is this an indicator of something serious? She wonders if it's because her passenger side CV is supposedly on it's way out. (I doubt it, and it's not even bad enough to hear it clicking yet). I used to have a '95 Tracker with automatic hubs, and it said to reverse a few feet after disengaging 4WD...is there a chance that backing up a few feet could loosen hers up any? She says it doesn't, but I've never tried it myself.

Anyway, I've always heard of how reliable and bulletproof manual hubs are, but having to wrestle one of them into "lock" every time is certainly a real pain-in-the-you-know-what!

I have a Matchbox vehicle called the "Quick-Sander". It's obviously a desert-race type truck, with rally lights and spare tires in the tailgate, but since it has a generic name, it's not a copy of any real truck. It reminds me of desert-racing Touaregs that I've seen, but not quite. One thing that I wonder about is that it has a large black mesh grill on the roof, that looks a lot like the mesh you see on top of the hoods of race SUVs. This could easily be for the radiator, which is often rear-mounted on desert trucks, but underneath, the drivetrain looks an awful lot like a rear-mounted transfer case with a shaft running to the front differential. Has anyone ever heard of a rear-engine SUV (other than that awful Lamborghini SUV concept)?

I know I can't put much stock in what the driveshaft looks like, since it's just a toy (I also have a 1937 Cord 812 with a very distinct driveshaft and rear differential...even though the Cord 812 is strictly a front-wheel drive car!). I'm just curious whether rear-engine race "SUV's" exist.

I;d never thought of this before, but you know how you see various abbreviations for different drivetrain layouts in automobiles? Like "FR" is Front-engine, Rear-wheel Drive (your standard rear-drive car/truck), and "RMR" is for "Rear-Mid-engine, Rear-wheel drive", like a Ferrari, with the engine behind the driver and the rear wheels are driven. So, what is a normal 4WD pickup truck called? FAWD? F4WD? Or how about some modern supercars, with a rear-engine and AWD? RMAWD? RAWD?

I just bought a Hot Wheels "Citroen C4 Rally". The closest real car I can find to it is the 2007 Citroen C4 WRC. The only "info" that came with the toy says it makes "420 lb-ft of torque", but the real car uses a 2.0L XU7JP4 inline-4 of 315bhp. I somehow doubt that it really makes 420lb-ft of torque. Does anyone know the real stats on this engine, or a good place to find the technical details of the real car? None of the sites I've found list torque as one of the stats, even though they have all sorts of other details.

I just bought my nephew some Matchbox "Sky Busters" toy airplanes. One of them is obviously a real plane, a Cessna Citation X, but the other is only called the "Sky Knife"...it's a more or less standard business jet, with fuselage-mounted twin engines, low wings, winglets, etc...but it has a twin tail. Is this based on, or even inspired by a real aircraft, or is it total fiction? I can't find any twin-boom jets that are close to that size. The closest I can come is the Adam A700, but that's only vaguely similar. Any ideas on this?

I can't find anything about the US M1, M2, and M3 versions of the French/British Hispano 20mm, aka HS.404, other than brief mention of it on the "Hispano-Suiza HS.404" Wikipedia page. It says that they all suffered awful reliability, due to "soft-strikes" on the primer because of a chamber that was cut slightly larger than the (perfectly acceptable) British versions, but that's about IT. Where can I read more about these guns, who produced them and why they were so unreliable, and how they worked in operation. I know the P-38 Lightning mounted one, and the P-61 Black Widow mounted 4, so they must have worked a LITTLE at least...especially in the P-61A's without the .50cal turrets. I mean, how awful is "awful" reliability? Could you ever even fire a burst without a gun jamming? And if you did, how did you clear it and re-cock it?

I have a 5 year old female Rottweiler/Doberman mix, who is a very beautiful and wonderful dog. Lately, when she lies on the couch or the bed, or even the carpet, when she gets up there is a good-sized damp spot under where she was lying. I can't tell if it's from her licking herself (which she also does more than it seems like she ought to sometimes) or if she's "leaking". It smells vaguely like urine, but not obviously enough to be sure. The only thing I've ever seen like this before was in the wintertime, after we would go for long walks in really cold weather she'd start licking herself a lot once we got back inside...I was thinking of the way your ears and toes burn when you get inside after being out in the cold. (Doesn't sound real nice in her case!). But I noticed that sometimes you could see a small drop of clearish-looking fluid come out, and then she'd start licking at it...usually she'd jump up like she was surprised. Anyway, it's summer now, but she's been leaving those same wet spots, and I swear I saw a little fluid come out a couple days ago, right before she frantically began licking at herself.

Is there some kind of urinary tract infection, or irritation? Or is it her bladder control? Is it urine that comes out, or something else? I can't think what, but it's worrisome...I love my dog very much. I also feel bad because I was a bit lazy about bringing her out promptly every morning this winter...she never complained or asked to go out, but that's no excuse. Could I have caused these issues by forcing her to hold it in for too long too often?

Any help would be wonderful, and it's for a good cause...I know a lot of people think that they have the best dog in the world, but in my case I think I really DO! You'd have to know her to understand! =)

I know this is a really dumb question...I know a lot about planes, and how they work and how to fly them, more than most people...but I just realized that I hadn't thought of this since years ago. Well, this is a 2-part question...first, in a plane, to yaw RIGHT, you push the RIGHT rudder pedal, correct? It's not like "opposite", where you'd push the LEFT pedal to yaw RIGHT, is it? That's JUST yaw, no banking or anything.

For the second part of the question, I'm assuming that I've been correct all along and "Right Rudder=Right Yaw".

When one begins a right-hand turn, you bank to the right...then, does the nose tend to "dive" INTO the turn, so you have to use LEFT rudder to keep the turn coordinated, or does the nose try to go LEFT, OUT of the turn, so you have to use the RIGHT rudder to keep the nose pointing into the turn?

I'm embarrassed to even ask, but I realized that I don't actually know! I always assumed that "right rudder yaws right", and to turn to the right, one banks right and pushes the right rudder pedal, yawing into the turn. But I was just thinking of centrifugal force (or centripetal, rather), and couldn't decide whether it would try to resist the nose turning into the bank, forcing you to use rudder to yaw into the turn, or if gravity would try to pull the nose down, forcing you to use the rudder to yaw AGAINST the turn so you don't go into a dive when you bank.

Any help would be awesome...a US(i)* $50,000 prize is being offered....

*US(i) = United States (imaginary) Dollars

I'm curious...I was just thinking on this last night. I know quite a bit about different aircraft types, and I know most of how takeoffs and landings work. I know that "rotation" in a tricycle airplane is when you pitch-up at a certain airspeed during the takeoff run, increasing the AOA, and lifting off. You hold it level until rotation speed, and pull back on the stick to pitch-up, right? Now, on older, slower tailwheel planes (old biplanes, etc), it looks like you just speed up until you lift off, since your wings are already at high AOA to the wind, right? But with more modern types, it seems that the tail lifts off the ground as you gain speed, and then the plane lifts off. Does it do that by itself, or does the pilot actually put slight FORWARD pressure on the stick to move the elevators down? That would increase the stabilizers camber and increase the lift, raising the tail off the ground...then once you reach safe takeoff speed, you pull BACK on the stick, lowering the tail and increasing the wings AOA to give lift-off? I see it as just like rotation in a tricycle-gear plane, only the tricycle plane starts out level to the ground and a tailwheel plane has to be MADE level using the elevators until rotation speed is reached? Basically, I'm just asking whether a tailwheel pilot has to put forward pressure on the stick until he rotates, or if he just holds it "neutral" until it's time to pull back and lift off, same as a tricycle plane? I somehow can't imagine a Spitfire reaching takeoff speed still nose-up and with the pilot blind to the front. The only other explanation I can think of is that the tail just naturally lifts off the ground as you accelerate down the runway, and no forward input is needed on the stick, just pull back to take off, like a tricycle gear plane?

I'm curious...I was looking through info on the P-61 Black Widow, and among the numerous black boxes it lists the "SCR-522 Command Radio". I've looked around a bit, and found a few references to it and other "command radios", but I still don't know what it's function is. The nearest I can guess is that it is sort of a "master" radio set that combines the info from all the other radio devices. Obviously one man couldn't operate as many different pieces of equipment as are listed in the P-61 individually. Am I right? Is "command radio" a term for a "master radio" that is the ultimate "user interface" for complex multi-unit radio systems?

I was thinking about this earlier...how did old-school fighters like the F-104 target and fire the AIM-9 Sidewinders with no HUD? Was the only thing they had the auditory "tone" that told the pilot when it was locked on? I may be wrong, but I think all they had were reflector sights for the Vulcan cannon on the F-104. I can't imagine the analog electrics back then making a gunsight that could show what the seeker is looking at, like modern HUD's keep a little mark on the target. I guess it would work without any visual, but you wouldn't know exactly which plane in front of you it was locked on to, if there were several (never mind manually selecting one!) I guess at 50,000ft altitude and 1000yds behind a several Russian bombers, it probably doesn't matter WHICH one it locks on to! LOL. Just make sure your wingman stays behind you!

(Although on a related note, I heard that even the Mighty AMRAAM is a bit "iffy" about who it wants to choose once it goes active!)

I was just curious, anyway, whether the audio "tone" was the only thing they had. All in all, the newer ones sure seem better. The AIM-9 and AIM-7 didn't exactly distinguish themselves with the USAF in SE Asia...quite amazing to see what the Sidewinder has evolved into these days compared with the old straight-pursuit, one-color, "wiggly", conical-seekered, smoky and easily-duped AIM-9B that only looked good next the even worse Sparrow. Not to diss on anybody's favorite missiles...the AIM-9 Lima is an excellent weapon. Hardly even LOOKS the same as the first gen AIM-9B.

Okay, this is a second try...I tried to be specific before, but it didn't work.

---Why would a SINGLE SEAT F-104A or C Starfighter *IN USAF MARKINGS* have a long-chord tail like the F-104G or S?

---I was looking this morning through Starfighter pictures, (both drawings and photos) and a bit less than half the *USAF* planes have long-chord rudders (i.e. it sticks out over the tail more than normal) just like an F-104G.

FACTS

---F-104A and C are 1-seaters, and can have either type of tail

---F-104B and D are 2-seaters and can have either type of tail

---There ARE numerous pictures of Starfighters *IN USAF MARKINGS* that have the "G"-type tail.

---1 or 2 seater makes NO difference...I saw both 1 AND 2-seater planes with BOTH long and short-chord rudders

---There are photos captioned as A, B, C, and D types, some have long rudders, while others have short, regardless of type.

So...

---It's NOT the German/Danish/Etc. F-104G or the Italian F-104S (it has USAF markings)

---It's NOT the NF-104 with the rocket-booster (although that DOES have a long-chord rudder)

---It's NOT the Canadian CF-104 (again, USAF markings)

---It's NOT the XF or YF-104

So...

A.) Did they change the design to a long-chord rudder 1/2-way through F-104A production?

B.) Did the F-104C = long-chord rudder and the F-104A = short-chord? (In which case I saw several wrongly-captioned photos)

C.) Did either the A/B or the C/D leave the factory with the long-chord rudder, or were they field-modified?

D.) Could any 2-seat B/D jets have been altered to make them single-seat planes?

E.) Did the USAF ever use any F-104G's, or were those ONLY in Europe?

I WOULD have just assumed that the "C" had a larger rudder than the "A" since it was designed as a nuclear strike fighter, but there are pictures of A's AND C's with the large tail. Either the captions are wrong, or it made no difference if it was a A or a C.

I know that sounds like a lot, but I'm stumped. I can't find anything regarding tail-differences in USAF planes. The most I've found is brief mentions of the F-104G having a larger rudder, which is pretty obvious. I just want to know how USAF Starfighters could have had both types, regardless of the number of seats or which variant it is. Did they have different "Production Blocks" like the F-16?

PS--I DO NOT meant the ventral fin that was added to increase stability...I mean the RUDDER and VERTICAL STABILIZER.

I came across a toy F-104 Starfighter recently. It's not neccesarily accurate, but it's in Vietnam-type camo and has USAF markings, wingtip tanks and the long-chord rudder like the F-104G and S have. I've looked around a bit, and the USAF used the F-104A and -C single seat and -B and -D two-seaters seaters. I thought at first that the the 2-seaters had longer-chord rudders, but looking at pictures, it seems that there are USAF Starfighters of ALL FOUR types with BOTH types of fin. Why does 1 out of 4 Starfighters have the F-104G type long-chord fin? I can't find any specific type, so it's not JUST the "C" or "D" versions, and it's not just the 2-seaters. In fact, some 2-seaters have the SMALL fin. Is this some field-modification? Why doesn't anyone ever mention it? Did the USAF ever use the F-104G? I'm HOPING that the captions were wrong on the pictures...it would make a lot more sense if the long-chord rudder was actually the F-104C and the small one was the A, but that's not what the pictures say. Anyone know anything about this? It's bugging me.

I asked everyone how to type a "degrees symbol" on my kepypad, and they all told me to make sure that I had pushed "NUM LK" and then push ALT + 0176 or 1248. It didn't work. I can't even get the little light over the NUM LK button to turn on, although I know it comes on sometimes when I accidently hit it instead of "backspace". It kind of frustrating. And why the hell do you have to go through all this just to type a symbol? How many code-combos do you have to memorize just to get around your keyboard? Jeez. Help, anyone? (I have a laptop, no number pad)

I've been wondering for a while: what do I push to make the screen print a "degrees" symbol (as in "25 degrees angle", or "25 degrees Farenheit", etc)? It's not marked on any of the secondary functions, like how you push "SHIFT" + "1" to get a "!". Anyone know? I hate having to type "25deg." every time, especially when I'm trying to cram into a 500 character "comment box" on YouTube, etc. For that matter, do Windows computers have a "Key Caps" type function? Back in High School we used Macs, and you could open "Key Caps" and it would show a little keyboard and screen. When you hit "SHIFT", all the keys would switch to the alternate (i.e. all the letters would go upper case, and the numbers would become their symbols, etc) until you let the SHIFT key go. I'm assuming the "ALT + (something)" will give you various symbols, like "TM" and "Rights Reserved", and if I had "Key Caps", I could figure out what does what. At the least, please tell me what to push to get a "degrees" symbol? I would appreciate it greatly. Thanks.