HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: conrad@pico.qpsx.oz.au (Conrad Drake)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: open-wheel drag (Re: F1 Stuff)
Date: 17 Nov 92 00:48:32 GMT
Reply-To: conrad@pico.qpsx.oz.au
Organization: QPSX Communications
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

andyw@meaddata.com (Andy Welter) writes:
: 
: Physics question:  What are the units that Cd is measured in???  How do you 
: convert Cd to the actual force of drag at a given speed?

The easy part
    F = cd.A.v^2   (cd x area x velocity squared) 

The hard part.   I had thought that it was dimensionlesss, but I'm not
sure, as F = accn.mass = kg.m/s^2

so  cd.m^2.(m/s)^2 = kg.m/s^2
->  cd = kg/m^3  !!!

Things that make you go hmmm..

Somebody please point out the error of my ways.
Email: conrad@pico.qpsx.oz.au
Snail: QPSX Communications, Private Bag 24, West Perth 6005, Australia. 
Numbers:(ph) +61 9 324 1641, (fx) +61 9 321 2984 (dod) 0604
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen)
Subject: F1: 1992 Top Ten Drivers Competition
Reply-To: top10@wes.on.ca
Organization: Waterloo Engineering Software
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 01:46:52 GMT


The 1992-1993 Autocourse is coming out shortly, and it will include the
traditional Autocourse Top Ten driver rankings.  

So, as it happens, I'm the eternal sucker for receiving mail :), so I'm
now accepting submissions for the 1992-1993 Internet Top Ten entries.  The
entries will close when Autocourse hits the store shelves -- and I don't
know exactly when that will be -- so get your entry in early.

Once Autocourse is out (Someone, please let me know as soon as you see it!)
I will combine the entries, using a weighting similar to the F1PP competi-
tion, to arrive at the Internet Top Ten rankings.

Also, the person closest to the actual Autocourse rankings will be named 
and revered as an expert and visionary.  :)

RULES:
    - Send your votes to top10@wes.on.ca (or uunet!wes.on.ca!top10)
    - Your entry must be dated prior to the release of 1992-1993 Autocourse

    - You must vote for all ten drivers
    - Only drivers driving in F1 in 1992 are eligible
    - If you don't vote for 10 eligible drivers, the entry will not be counted

BONUS:
    - Vote for the best young driver in F1 in 1992!

That's it!  Get your entries in NOW...

[ \tom haapanen  |  "only auto racing, bullfighting and mountain climbing are ]
[ tomh@wes.on.ca |   sports -- all others are only games" -- ernest hemingway ]
[ waterloo engineering software |     "to thine own self be true" -- polonius ]
From: thos@suite.sw.oz.au (Thomas Cohen)
Subject: Porsche at Le Mans (was Re: F1 Stuff)
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd
Date: 15 Nov 92 21:36:17 GMT

In <BxH5ts.Lux@umassd.edu> rgolen@UMASSD.EDU writes:

>As a result of FIA's ban on moveable aerodynamic devices in early 1969
>the flaps were made non-moveable for the 69 LeMans. This upset the
>aerodynamics of the 917 Long and Short tails considerably. One effect
>of this was the death of English privateer John Woolfe when his 917
>went out of control as the rear wheels lost contact with the ground
>I believe at the end of the Mulsanne during the opening laps.

Actually at White House (La Maison Blanche).

>short tail version had enhanced stability. Porsche continued to
>develop its "long tailed" version for LeMans, but with large
>vertical fins joined by a horizontal wing. Interestingly enough,
>the special LeMans versions never won the race, and were marginally
>faster per lap than their short tailed bretheren.

They were much faster along Mulsanne (Jo Siffert saw 236mph+ in 1971,
and maintained that the speed measuring point was not at the fastest
point of the straight).
John Wyer, a clear thinking man, always maintained that it was
unnecessary to tune the car for all-out speed at Le Mans, as Mulsanne
was only a fraction of the entire lap, and whatever speed you gained
on the straight you lost in handling over the rest of the course - and
he was right. Also interesting was that the 917s were getting over 
200 mph 4 times a lap!

regards,
-- 
thos cohen                  ,not a typo        |Softway Pty Ltd
"It's not so bad to be a lair but a conniving  |ACSnet:         thos@softway.oz
 egomaniac is not really that socially accept- |UUCP: ...!uunet!softway.oz!thos
 able."  SMH, 2 Nov 92, P. Keating vs J. Hewson|Internet:    thos@softway.oz.au
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: taylor@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Ross Taylor,Peyt312,6652,2655436)
Subject: Re: US Citizenship (was: Andretti)
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 02:18:11 GMT

From article <7225546097614@c00027-207dan.eos.ncsu.edu>, by jcsmith@eos.ncsu.edu (Jay C. Smith):
> In article <1992Nov18.223804.18398@news.clarkson.edu> 
> taylor@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Ross Taylor,Peyt312,6652,2655436) writes:
>>Note that if NM (or any one else) does what Robert says, he/she
>>does not lose their UK citizenship.  The only way to lose UK
>>citizenship is to renounce it in front of a representative of the
>>Queen (the consulate staff I suppose).  This is true for UK
>>citizens but may not be true for other nationals; it depends
>>on the laws of the other country, not so much on the laws of the US.
> 
> But (and *please* correct me if I'm wrong), I think that an item Robert left 
> off his list of requirements to become a US citizen is that one must renounce 
> all foreign citizenships.  But I don't know if NM would be required to do it 
> in front of an official British representative, so it may not count under 
> British law.

I don't believe that this is true now (I don't know if it was true
before).  I have made some vague inquiries in this direction as
I have lived here for over 12 years but retain UK citizenship.  If
I take out US citizenship it will only be because I can retain 
a UK passport as well.

I have a couple of friends who have taken US citizenship recently and
they did not have to renounce citizenship of other countries (one
UK, one canada).  The US/brit has two passports, the Canadian has none
(I don't know what that means).

In any event, even if US citizenship requires revocation of foreign
citizenships, it is not valid in UK law unless it is done in front
of a rep of the queen.

> I know, I know, I've heard people brag about having "dual citizenship," as in 
> "I can vote in the US Presidential election and the French elections," etc.,
> but I think that's only because many voter registrars are more concerned 
> about checking residency than citizenship.  Heck, I'm not even sure if 
> citizenship is required to vote in the US (it seems like it should be, but 

Yes it is, I can't even vot ein local elections or in school board elections.

> Jay C. Smith

Ross Taylor

Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: Tim Dudley <dudley.chi@xerox.com>
Subject: Senna to Ferrari?
X-Xxdate: Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:59:27 GMT
Organization: bnr
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d11
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:58:41 GMT

A brief (!) note in Friday's Montreal Gazette said that Ferrari was
glad to hear that Senna had announced he would drive for them.  They then
said that their two confirmed drivers were currently 
Berger and Alesi.

Hard to know what to think about this one...

Tim
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: Why doesn't Cheever have a ride?
From: hagood@sabre.den.mmc.com (Dave Hagood)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 02:54:52 GMT
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics Group

In article <s-q1Hxwuva@atlantis.psu.edu>, EHP@snowyt.me.psu.edu (PADDOCK, EVERETT H.) writes:
|> Stuff deleted ...
|>
|> Anyway, WHY DOESN'T EDDIE HAVE A RIDE?!
|>

	A better question might be why Martin Brundle doesn't have a ride...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
									|
David M. Hagood			Martin Marietta Astronautics Group	|
									|
Voice:  (303) 977-9657		When in danger, or in doubt,		|
E-mail: hagood@den.mmc.com	Run in circles, scream and shout.	|
Fax: (303) 977-1530							|
									|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
     static char *disclaimer = "My opinions, not Martin Marietta's."    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: humpty@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Daniel Ong)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: Aus GP Stuff
Date: 16 Nov 1992 06:26:58 GMT
Organization: The University of Western Australia
NNTP-Posting-Host: tartarus.uwa.edu.au

ecrjbruce@economics.adelaide.edu.au writes:

>>  In my book this counts as Mansell
>> doing something stupid, There was no way Senna could avoid it.

>Funny how Nigel managed to do it in Spain (?) a couple of years back, and he
>was hounding Senna even more closely than Senna was here.

>> Watching the interviews afterwards showed how much Senna had matured
>> and what a whinger Mansell really is.  Senna basically said "These
>> things happen", Mansell ranted and raved like a two year old.

>It's always easy to be a "these things happen" type when you're in the wrong. 
>From what we saw the Williams was not as responsive to braking as the McLaren
>(due to carbon fibre type used?) so NM had to brake earlier.  As for braking
>20m earlier, go view the tape.  The carbon type brakes the Williams used glow
>red when the slightest touch was applied (got some great photo's)and I couldn't
>see it on the replay.


On Channel 7's Sportsworld program last Sunday, the showed Mansell on
the lap of the accident and on the previous lap.  The actions, lines,
braking points of Mansell were compared by placing the footages of the
two laps on the one screen.  The two windows showing the two laps were
synchronized to allow an accurate comparison.  The comparison clearly
indicated that Mansell braked substantially earlier and took a different
line on the accident lap.  

I guess Mansell must look like a fool now.

Last week, the West Australian newspaper contained an article quoting
Nigel Mansell.  Mansell said something like:  I regret not joining
Williams next year because I would have kicked Prost's ass real bad and
showed everybody who really is the best.
My comment:  hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha  - is this guy for
real???!!!!!
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: 1993 Probe -- two week initial impressions (long-ish)
From: <KANTOLA@NDSUVM1.BITNET>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:20:41 CST
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computer Network

In article <1992Nov15.081412.10539@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, ellisk@ucsu.Colorado.EDU
(Michael K. Ellis) says:
>and the dealership that sold it to me. To wit:
>
>Ordered the car on August 21st. Took delivery November 3rd.  This is, to
>me, UNACCEPTABLE.  Nor did, for instance, my dealer offer me a loaner to
>drive once the 'four to six weeks' they told me when I ordered passed.

     Man, we must have a great Ford dealership or something.  All I hear about
is how poor these dealerships have been giving services.  When we ordered our
1989 Sable through a dealership, it arrived one day late.  A dealer personally
delivered the car to our door (the dealership is over 60 miles away), had
mud flaps and some other odd accesorries installed free, sincerely apologized,
and gave us a "tour" of the car's features.  We still have the car and get
flyers in the mail every so often reminding to change the oil, but not
advertising, just saying to change the oil.  They also fixed the windshield
wipers which were not under warranty at the time.  We had to pay for the part
but the labor was free.  What can I say, I guess every dealership is a little
(lot) different.
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: TX_WAYNE@rrivax.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Johnson)
Subject: Re: Experiences with Pickups
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20
Organization: Robarts Research Institute
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 23:23:59 GMT

In <Bxz2sD.IGF@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com> ccw@slee07.srl.ford.com writes:
> wesf@boi.hp.com (Wes Fujii) writes:
> : michael.e.carey (mcarey@cbnewsb.cb.att.com) wrote:
> : : >
> : : >Diesels:
> : : >
> : : >Go with the Cummins (I understand Ford will be going with that motor, too)
> : : >if you can afford it.  The International engine in the Ford trucks is okay
> : : >but lacks the all-out-power of the Cummins.  I know several people that 
> : :   <stuff deleted> 
> : : 
> : : Woa!  I would like to know your source on Ford using the Cummins instead
> : : of the IH?  I haven't heard of this.  This would spell bad news for
> : : an already troubled Navistar.  As for the power of the IH, back when
> : : ford first started putting them in there trucks (then it was a 6.9 liter
> : : Diesel), the rear-ends could not take the power of the engine and they
> : : kept dropping out.  If they are going with the Cummins for power reasons,
> : : I hope that they are a little more prepared this time.
> : 
> : Heard it from a friend that is shopping for a diesel truck.  I admit that
> : my source is not all that great.  I'll try to pin him down on his source...
> : 
> 
> As I understand the situation, Chrysler has exclusive use of the Cummins
> engine until around the year 2000. 
> 

According to my brother-in-law, who owns a Ford dealership, Ford recently
bought out Cummins and plan to start using the engines in their trucks in
the near future.  While they can't stop Chrysler from buying the engines
due to their contract, they will make it "less attractive" for Chrysler
than it is now.

I've also heard that this is the reason Dodge is developing a truck version
of their V10 viper engine...


Wayne Johnson              |            '73 Dodge Challenger Rallye
Database Administrator     |--------------------------------------------------  
Robarts Research Institute |            "Go ahead, make my millenium."
London, Ontario, Canada    |                           Beetlejuice
"w.johnson@ctrg.rri.uwo.ca"|
From: danno@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Daniel Gary Soiney)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: Driving with parking lights only
Date: 23 Nov 1992 20:31:37 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

I find that when it starts to get dark, the glare from oncoming headlights
is annoying, thats why i drive with my parking lights on at dusk.  My car is
more visible than one with no lights and i am not glaring at eyes that
have not gotten used to night driving
danno

Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: mengsoo@bnr.ca (Meng Soo)
Subject: Re: Driving with parking lights only
Reply-To: mengsoo@bnr.ca (Meng Soo)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 19:21:04 GMT


>Actually I do find that parking lights increase visibility alot.  Especially
>in overcast weather. 
>
>I also believe that some Scandanavian countries require the use of "driving
>lights"
>on cars that automatically turn on with the car's ignition.  This is due to the
>greatly extended dusk and dawn periods from being so far north.
>
>Any far northerners wanna give the straight scoop on this subject?

Here in Canada, "daytime running lights" so they're called, are required by law
on new cars. They turn on whenever the car is running, and are an excellent safety feature, IMHO. There have been many times which I've seen the lights of an oncoming car much earlier than I would have seen the car itself. Espically if the car is light coloured and blends in with the surrounding light.

I don't see what the big deal with turning on the headlights every time you start the car. It's become a habit, just like putting on the seatbelt.

What really annoys me are badly aimed headlights, or the infamous "cyclops".

Meng
From: rick.cantu@cutting.hou.tx.us (Rick Cantu) 
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: DRIVER'S RIGHTS
Date: 15 Nov 92 23:41:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Cutting Edge - Houston, TX - 713-466-1525
Reply-To: rick.cantu@cutting.hou.tx.us (Rick Cantu) 

I have been researching traffic laws and the such,several methods of how
you can know what your rights are and/or win when going to court. The
key question when you get stopped is to ask what you did wrong? Then ask
the cop what would happen if a person does not sign the ticket. If he
responds, go to jail, then sign the ticket, BUT BEFORE you do, first
write UNDER DURRESS or (Threat or Coercion). Which should reserve your
constitutional rights (remember those). If anyone would like more info
on how to win in traffic court, if you write me, I'll recommend a couple
books written by experienced pro's, and or other information. Also if
anyone has any interesting case and would like to share it, would also
be welcome. I'm am trying to find out as much of my rights or options as
possible and wouldn't mind sharing mutual information. YOU CAN REACH ME
BY WRITING  to: P.O.BOX 1964, Spring, TX 77383.
(THIS ADVISE IS OF MY OPINION ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE THOUGHT OF AS LEGAL
ADVISE)
                                        
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: nau@ssesco.com (William Nau)
Subject: Re: driving tips
Organization: SSESCO
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:36:27 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.194810.13429@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>, fengxi@prancer.eche.ualberta.ca (Fengxi Zhou) writes:
|>     Once I was driving on a hiway.  For some reason, the car started drifting
|> sideways and I corrected a little too abruptly.  Then the weight started to 
|> shift from side to side as the car snaked forward wider and wider.  At the time,
|> I was driving at about 100kph.  I first tried "opposite lock".  No good.  THen I
|> braked, lifted off the throttle, while struggling to bring the car back.  Of
|> course, these were the wrong moves since the car ended up in the ditch.  What
|> should I have done to address such situation?
|>     Any tips you can share with me are greatly appreciated.

Keep your feet away from the pedals (I only know rear wheel drive).  Do not
overreact.  Keep those front wheels pointed to where you want to go.  Do
not overcompensate.  Undercompensate if you must.  Overdoing it is what
caused you to swing from side to side.  Once you feel that you are bringing
the car back under control, gently (very gently) apply the brakes or 
downshift.

I repeat that you do not want to overreact.  That will put in in the ditch
(if you're lucky) every time.
-- 
William R. Nau
Supercomputer Systems Engineering and Services Company (SSESCO)
511 11th Avenue South, Suite 216
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415-1536
(612) 342-0003

nau@SSESCO.com
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: Mike.Oniffrey@launchpad.unc.edu (Mike Oniffrey)
Subject: Re: Gas Mileage and Headlights
Organization: UNC EBBS
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 14:54:02 GMT

In article <1992Nov22.072901.6084@scott.skidmore.edu>
jdrout@scott.skidmore.edu (JTD is lost) writes:                            
                       
                                                                   
>In my MR (85, 5spd, no wing) I get better mileage with the lights
>down...Driving @ night definately cuts the mileage down.  I have done
>this over a course of 2 years driving...                                   

I can see how air resistance would be slightly raised with the lamps up,
thus breaking the aerodynamic design, but would it alone account for the
dramatic increase in MPG?  What about the increased resistance of the
alternator belt, since it would be more active at charging the battery,
since more appliances would be in use (headlamps, dash lights, etc), thus
robbing the engine of a few percent of horsepower, and resulting in
slightly lower gas mileage?

Onif
--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,rec.autos
From: cro69@cas.org ()
Subject: BEL XKR-VII Still Any Good?
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 19:05:37 GMT

As the title states, I have a fully functional BEL XKR-VII radar detector
that I bought a few years back.  Since I started reading this rec.autos.
driving, I've noticed discussions of many newer models which make me think
my old trusty may not be as able to detect newer radar bands the cops are
using (forget LIDAR even!).  This old buddy has saved me many a ticket in
the past, but am I over-trusting it in 1992?   I will be heading to Florida
this weekend as well as North Carolina and Western Penn.  Should I dump this
oldy-but-goodie for a new model?
---------------
Thanks- Chuck Ortt-
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: oyalcin@IASTATE.EDU (Onur Yalcin)
Subject: Re: Driving with parking lights only
Reply-To: oyalcin@IASTATE.EDU (Onur Yalcin)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 19:55:14 GMT

Where I come from, dome lights are used as a transition to the lowbeams, almost
by everyone. I think this is OK, since at dusk what you want to do is to improve
your visibility, rather than enlightening your path, as there is yet enough
light to see where you are going. This is the time where people just start to
switch on their lights, and obviously, not everyone does this at the same time.
The purpose of the dome lights emerges here: While their usage increases your
visibility, it does not cause as much contrast between those that have turned
their lights on, and those that have not. In the case of normal headlights, such
a contrast is high. The fact that other cars turn their headlights on at that
time, conspires to further "hide" those that have not turned their lights on
yet. So, the idea about the dome lights is to eliminate the unnecessary contrast
that is caused by the immature usage of the headlights.

So far, I deliberately avoided the term "parking lights" since this is
misleadingly constituting the basis for the argument set forth by those who are
against the usage of the dome lights. In fact, parking lights are those that
light up the dome lights that are on ONE side of the car. So cars furnished with
parking lights essentially have right and left parking lights, and those that
are on the side where the traffic is supposed to flow, are lit (on most cars,
this is done by leaving the turning signal on). And the "lights on" warning
signal does not beep when you leave them on. None of the American cars that I
have driven had parking lights like these, this must be why this term replaces
the term "dome lights" in your jurgain. In Turkish, we use distinct terms for
each, and "park lambasi" (=>park lamp) refers to those that I have just
described. I know that most cars in other European countries are also furnished
with parking lights, and that they are widely used. 

My "Americanized" Renault 21 does not have parking lights, and it emits a
warning beep in case you leave your dome lights on, which is not what should
happen if they were designed to be "parking lights", since that would mean that
you would leave your car continuously beeping if you want to have those lights
on as "parking lights". 

The use of dome lights is actually more considerate than what most people have
criticised here. Admittedly, I find it "cool", too. But the bottomline is that
this is not so important, after all; and the real target, if any, for such
criticism  should be those people that insist on NOT turning any type of light
on when necessary.



--
Onur Yalcin 
oyalcin@iastate.edu

"Serefe"
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: goudreau@robin.rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: Night vision
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 18:06:41 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC

In article <62022@mimsy.umd.edu> hagger@cs.umd.edu (Paul Hagger) writes:
>
>I was wondering why the US has not imposed equivalent road marking
>requirements as I have experienced in Europe.
>...
>Does anybody know if the US ever attempted to improve the visibilty of
>road markings in any way?  And if not, why not?

Because roads are built and maintained by the states, not the federal
government.

In fact, many states (especially in the Sun Belt) do make extensive
use of road reflectors.  It's less common in the northern states; I
guess they get tired of having to replace reflectors that get scraped
off by snow plows every winter...

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Goudreau			Data General Corporation
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com		62 Alexander Drive	
+1 919 248 6231			Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA