lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Propulsive efficiency

message: Would be nice to see P.E. values for the type of engines mentioned, say, at normal cruise speed.  Also, could P.E. figures for the Ion Engine be given as well?  Thanks.  Tony (talk) 17:28, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Typical Propulsion Efficiency Values

message: Is the Oberth effect about propulsive efficiency?  I'm not sure that's the case.  Maybe this should be discussed and straightened out.  DonPMitchell (talk) 21:26, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oberth effect? 

message: The article confuses between mechanical efficiency and propulsive efficiencies.
The propulsive efficiency (eta_p) is the ratio of useful power used to propel a vehicle to the available power in a jet. It is equal to (Thrust*VehicleVelocity)/JetKineticEnergy
The mechanical efficiency (eta_m) is defined as the useful mechanical power available at a shaft relative to the power input. It is defined for SHAFTS. It should not appear in this article except may be as an analogy of the propulsive efficiency for engines powering shafts.
This article is called propulsive efficiency, therefore it should focus on propulsive efficiency, not on overall efficiency and not on mechnical efficiency. Amgadoz (talk) 05:00, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  confusing mechanical and propulsive efficiencies 

message: Propulsive efficiency is independent of mechanical efficiencies. It depends on nothing except the velocities and massflows entering and exiting the propulsor.
The question which propulsive efficiency answers is "how much thrust do we achieve for a given amount of power applied to the air?"
I'm out of time for today, but I am sure there is some good material on this available either from NASA, from Mark Drela, who usually writes very understandably, or in one of the standard books on aerospace engineering.
The information in the section on propellers is not useless, and I have no reason to believe it to be wrong, but I'm sure that it belongs in another place, since it does not deal with propulsive efficiency.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:980:5F25:1:1692:C4FD:B0BA:71FA (talk) 20:16, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section on propulsive efficiency of propeller does not actually deal with propulsive efficiency
Talk:Flow separation

message: "An example of this is the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. The shedding vortices reached the resonance frequency of the bridge and ultimately caused it to collapse"
TACOMA bridge failure IS NOT due to a resonance but to a flutter phenomenon: see "Tacoma Narrows Bridge" on Wikipedia:
"The bridge's spectacular self-destruction is often used as an object lesson in the necessity to consider both aerodynamics and resonance effects in civil and structural engineering. However the effect that caused the destruction of the bridge should not be confused with forced resonance (as from the periodic motion induced by a group of soldiers marching in step across a bridge).[8] In the case of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, there was no periodic disturbance. The wind was steady at 42 mph (67 km/h). The frequency of the destructive mode, 0.2 Hz, was neither a natural mode of the isolated structure nor the frequency of blunt-body vortex shedding of the bridge at that wind speed. The event can only be understood while considering the coupled aerodynamic and structural system which requires rigorous mathematical analysis to reveal all the degrees of freedom of the particular structure and the set of design loads imposed"
----
Technically the "effects of separation" section is dealing more with wakes from bluff bodies than boundary layer separation. Also, a Karman vortex street is a low-Reynolds number phenomenon, and vortex shedding != Karman vortex street (however, Karman vortex streets are a subset of vortex shedding).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.39.25.27 (talk) 10:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Boundary layer separation
Talk:Clem Sohn

message: 6000 meters?  Can we get as reference to this height?  RJFJR (talk) 23:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Altitude
Talk:Pitch-up

message: I'm fairly sure the statement about forward swept wings is nonsense. With forward swept wings, the roots do stall first, so any resultant roll moment is small, so a spin is less likely (good, but not pertinent to this subject) but the roots on a forward swept wing is further back than the tip (by definition), so the centre of pressure still shifts forward! The tips are still more heavily loaded, so the 2 contributory effects oppose, as rather than reinforce each other, but the stated effect would still tend to cause pitch up & if it is more powerful than the effect of lift distribution (eg. because the tips are washed out, or the wings are elliptical), I'm fairly sure pitch up could certainly still happen (?)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.172.13 (talk) 23:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forward swept wings 

message: As suggested by , we have two articles on broadly the same topic and they should be merged. Sabre dance is the specific instance of pitch-up, as occurring with the F-100 Super Sabre. It could be merged to a section here, pretty much as a simple paste. This would give one better article overall. There's little interest in the F-100 condition without the broader aerodynamic picture across other aircraft. As the aircraft most affected by it, the F-100 would otherwise be a large omission from pitch-up. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:00, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree.  Sabre Dance a specific low-speed nose-up stall inherent in swept-wing aircraft, not unique to F-100 Sabres; "pitch-ups" can occur at any speed in swept-wing craft.  So long as these distinguishing points are made clear, merge. Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 19:00, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed and . Klbrain (talk) 11:08, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge of [[Sabre dance (aerodynamics)|Sabre dance]]
Talk:Zero-lift axis

message: Does the zero lift axis depend on airspeed?  I think the article should answer this question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.244.32.56 (talk) 05:48, 22 January 2015‎
:In any incompressible flow around an airfoil there is no reason to expect the orientation of the zero-lift axis to vary with different flow speeds. In transonic, sonic and supersonic flows around an airfoil the orientation of the zero-lift axis is likely to vary with Mach number. I haven't looked for a published source for my views. Dolphin (t) 06:14, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question Re: Airspeed
Talk:Dynamic stall

message: Makes perfect sense to me. Even has grammar, unlike the comment above.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.63.133.36 (talk) 18:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sense 

message: I just found there's a similar article, stall delay. Possibly it is better to merge them together. --Dynamicsoar (talk) 13:29, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually in looking over that article and this one I think they both should be merged into Stall (flight). - Ahunt (talk) 15:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree they should both go into Stall (flight). Dynamic stall and Stall delay are presented in Wikipedia as being the same.  They are not sufficiently distinctive to warrant an article separate from Stall (flight). Dolphin (t) 02:02, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay I think we have sufficient consensus to do that, so I have merged the content of both articles to Stall (flight). - Ahunt (talk) 19:07, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger w/ [[stall delay]]?
Talk:Muchalls Castle

message: "The lower course is a well preserved double groined 13th century towerhouse structure, built by the Frasers of Muchalls" The lower course? What does that mean?? --208.65.188.23 (talk) 01:42, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a continuous layer of a material, such as bricks or stone, in a wall or foundation L'Oiseau Lybre (talk) 09:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Wording question
Talk:Cooper–Harper rating scale

message: Is anyone aware of any examples of aircraft that have attained particular ratings? I'm aware that the Rotary Rocket Atmospheric Test Vehivle attained a 10, but couldn't find any other references.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.155.152.138 (talk) 13:36, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples?
Category talk:Flight simulation video games

message: I would suggest adding "Over G Fighters," a combat flight simulation game for the Xbox 360. If "Ace Combat" can be considered a flight simulator (which I'd have to disagree w/), then Over G should definitely be listed. Unlike Ace Combat, (an Action game), Over G inc incorporates true physics and real missiles and is a true flight simulator.
71.205.190.190 16:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Sweep theory

message: This article is mostly an explanation of sweep theory without mentioning examples of aircraft.  It covers the same science though as swept wing.  These are the same topic at heart, and this article's content would appropirately fit as a section in swept wing ✈ James C. (talk) 01:27, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[Swept wing]] 

message: Although I have no special knowledge of fluid dynamics, I am a physicist and would thus expect myself to comprehend an article in this field in a general audience encyclopedia. However, I am just unable to understand what a sentence like "The resulting air pressure distribution is equivalent to the length of the wing's chord" is supposed to tell me, as a length and a distribution are entities of entirely different nature. In general I found the swept wing article much more helpful to understand the subject, with this article adding little to nothing on top. 2.28.219.128 (talk) 12:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Your point is very valid.  In the discussion threads above, and also at the head of the article itself, there is the proposal that the content of this article should be merged with Swept wing.  Unfortunately those threads have gone cold over the last couple of years so I guess whoever proposed merging is no longer watching.  I will look at it over the next week. Dolphin (t) 13:10, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. After reading a bit into the subject, I found the most useful part of this article to be the entries from the (incorrectly titled) "references" section. I've added them to the swept wing article as well. 2.28.219.128 (talk) 14:14, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article quality
Talk:Palazzo della Ragione, Padua

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Palazzo della Ragione. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 4#Palazzo della Ragione until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Cnilep (talk) 01:20, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Palazzo della Ragione" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Good morning, I am a student of the University of Bergamo and for my assignment of Heritage Studies and ICT [1] I have added some lines saying that Palazzo della Ragione has been declared part of a UNESCO World Heritage site and why. I have also created two paragraphs: "History" and "The frescoes". I am available in case of any questions or doubts. MyaJourneyBoo (talk) 21:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Palazzo della Ragione as part of a UNESCO World Heritage Site
Talk:Adolf Busemann

message: "At the time of his proposal, flight much beyond 300 miles per hour had not been achieved, and it was considered an academic curiosity"
Actually, shells and bullets were almost Mach 3 fast at that time, and aerodynamics of shells had made enough progress by 1916 already to allow for increased artillery ranges by using different shell shapes only. Lastdingo (talk) 16:09, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: achieved speeds
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Anthony.bradbury

message: Username	Anthony.bradbury
Total edits	3670
Distinct pages edited	2179
Average edits/page	1.684
First edit	09:07, April 2, 2006
	
(main)	1650
Talk	128
User	167
User talk	1610
Image	1
Wikipedia	107
Wikipedia talk	7
2006/4 	224 	
2006/5 	265 	
2006/6 	609 	
2006/7 	483 	
2006/8 	554 	
2006/9 	568 	
2006/10 	443 	
2006/11 	532
Month-by-month edit totals using Interiot's wannabe Kate's Tool. Nishkid64 01:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Rubrique-à-Brac

message: Propose that the article be moved because I think and all sources I've seen, indicates it's named incorrectly. The current name could seem like a translaton mishap with the :fr:Rubrique-à-Brac article, so I imagine this move might be non-controversial. Any thoughts? Murghdisc. 01:16, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I created the article. I added the "la" because that's how I've always referred to it, but I'm fine with the renaming. Fair Alienor (Talk) 16:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool. Obviously not a translation mishap then, but for the sake of source-correctness, I'll go ahead with the move. Murghdisc. 20:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move
Talk:Academic stole

message: Photo added in as per request Mabalu (talk) 10:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, but unfortunately nobody in that photograph is wearing a stole - they're all wearing hoods, which are entirely different garments.  A hood hangs down the back of the gown, while a stole (which is more common in an ecclesiastical context than an academic one) hangs down the front; it's not to be confused with facings, which are basically the lapels of the gown, and which are also sometimes made of a different colour or material to the rest of the gown.  See the photograph here for an example. -- Nicholas Jackson (talk) 11:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added photo
Talk:Wind power in Pakistan

message: I think we need another section in this article about the Jhempir project. --71.38.168.140 (talk) 23:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Section Needed
Talk:Chita Oblast

message: Ezhiki, the Russian wiki has updated its city/town population figures to the lateat 2005 figures right across Russia (which is reasonable as we cant wait ten-plus years for the next census). If you wish to question the validity of the new estimates I suggect you discuss it with someone from "over there" but the 2005 figures are included on official oblast websites, etc, so I dont think they are seriously in doubt. Jameswilson 00:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: James, thanks for the note.  Actually, lack of spelled-out references to the sources can always be grounds for removal of information in question (be it here or in the Russian Wikipedia).  The benefit of the Census population figures is that they are consistent across the board, while with estimates, you never know where they came from, even when they are official.  The main reason I removed your addition, however, was not solely for the lack of sources.  The list of "major cities and towns" you added duplicates information found in the link just above your addition, some of the names were misspelled, Sherlovaya Gora is not a city/town (it's an urban-type settlement), and where did "Krasnoborsk" come from (with population of 56K, no less)?  I hope you understand, but please feel free to contact me if you have questions.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Population figures

message: Was this area really unpopulated by humans prior to 1653 as implied in the article?  This seems unlikely.
:Most likely, the meaning is that the area was unpopulated by 'civilized' humans prior to 1653, like saying Americas were unpopulated until 1492. Mr0t1633 (talk) 16:50, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Population pre-1653?
Talk:Template processor

message: * comparison of template engines (basic)
* comparison glyphs and sub-element glyphs
* comparison ... (detailed) (will require split)
dr.ef.tymac 00:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TODO ;; preliminary edit todo items 

message: Does anyone mind if I rewrite the page a little? Because it seems to not really be very basic for those who don't deeply know about server-side code and such. Or should I just make a version of this wiki in "Simple English"?
Caleb870 02:22, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing 

message: SEE on Talk:Template#Template_system.3F.3F_.28redirecting_here.29.  -- User:Krauss 23 Nov 2006
:Hi Krauss, I looked at the link you posted and put a response. One thing to note is that this article is still undergoing edits and content additions, so things may not look exactly perfect just yet. "Under construction" still applies :) Thanks! dr.ef.tymac 09:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template System/engine redirection problems 

message: We have here the same questions: 
What can be, precisely, a Template and/or a Template preprocessor?  What is and what is not? 
I think there are very similar answers, and for a formal characterization we can modeling the template system (not web) as a dataflow. 
... and use the link "See details Formal treatment supplement".
(if need create and redirect "template system (formalism)" to "web template system (formalism)" article).
-- Krauss 24 Nov 2006.
:Yes, formal (precise) definition could prove useful, although it probably could stand that a "template processor" is (in part) just a highly-specialized kind of lexer, and thus the same mathematical conventions of assumptions of lexical analysis apply here as well, just with slightly different terminology. A common theme in this area is that there are a lot of "overlapping" technologies that do the same or similar things, but with different names because they historically evolved in different contexts. As they say, there's nothing new under the Sun. dr.ef.tymac 16:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Formal characterization, common referential sugestion 

message: Just for the sake of clarity, the article template processor generalization (aka superset concept, superclass, rubric) of other, more specialized instantiations of this concept. This is similar to the way that "web document" is a superset concept of "web page"; and automobile is a superset concept of Compact SUV. dr.ef.tymac 16:45, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  template processor as generalization 

message: Shouldn't someone have used a template processor to produce the summary for this article? 208.118.163.99 (talk) 20:06, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  We're Doing it Wrong 

message: While there isn’t currently an article at Templating language (it is just a redirect this page, Template processor), its creation should probably be considered in concert with any future expansion or refactoring of this article. Jim Grisham (talk) 20:02, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  New page for ‘Templating language’?
Talk:Rudi Ball

message: How was this Jew allowed to live in Germany all through the war playing hockey in the time of the so called Holocaust? Tommypowell 00:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There appears to be a simple answer to your question: there's a mistake in the article. Ball was only half Jewish: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2022/feb/17/rudi-ball-jewish-ice-hockey-star-germany-1936-winter-olympics Most German half Jews were not deported. The same goes for Helene Mayer referenced in the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:598:99B2:9C46:71D0:FB0E:4E0B:50B1 (talk) 11:09, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

text: Wow.  Amazed you have the guts to sign this obnoxious garbage.  That's sort of the POINT of why he was exceptional, and he wouldn't have been allowed on the team if the other star players hadn't gone to bat for him. Dan4th 02:04, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

text: No, the only thing that's proved is that (unfortunately) Hitler was smarter than you. Dan4th 20:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Seriously, though, if you really want to discuss this nonsense, go over to Holocaust Denial where someone might listen. Dan4th 21:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Or better yet put down down the crystal meth for a second and go to your local white power meeting.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 07:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Apart from his stupid anti-Semitism, the guy (I see he is banned) does ask an interesting question. The answer is that persecution of (particularly) German Jews was sometimes haphazard, and being an internationally renowned sportsman probably saved his life, although the fact that he was allowed to continue playing for Berlin SC till 1944 does seem somewhat strange. On the other hand Lufwaffe Field-Marshal Erhard Milch was half half Jewish, and upon hearing complaints about that fact Georing is alleged to have said "I decide who is Aryan"...82.46.139.31 (talk) 01:07, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Against Apion

message: Isn’t this book important not only for the history of Judaism but also for the history of Egypt, for the complex relationships between Jews and Egyptians, and for the links between both these nations with others such as Phoenicians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks/Macedonians and finally Romans? Shouldn’t the article recognise and explore these much wider contexts? Also, doesn’t the closing eulogy of Jewish theology and ethics illumine some of the diversity of beliefs flourishing in the first century CE? --Hors-la-loi (talk) 19:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure that much can be said of relations between Jews and Egyptians in general during that period.  Probably it was mostly Hellenized or semi-Hellenized Egyptians in the major northern cities who would have been likely to have sustained contact with Jews.  After the translation of the Septuagint Pentateuch into Greek during the second century B.C., some Greek-literate Egyptians would have become aware of the Exodus narrative, and might have been annoyed by its portrayal of their ancestors, or been motivated by the fact that they were aligned with the Greek side in Greek-Jewish tensions in Alexandria, and so came up with a counter-narrative... AnonMoos (talk) 11:27, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion needed!

message: To my layman's ear, the two quotes are more likely by Whiston than a twentieth or twenty-first century translator. Why? Why not use the most recent -- and hence, the most widely comprehended -- one? (There are three haths in one sentence!) It could be justified if it were widely agreed to be more accurate than any other, but not, I would say, for the pleasure eighteenth century English brings, or the elegance. Is there any reason to believe the original was elegant, rather than comprehensible? If one is seeking elegance or pleasure from eighteenth century English, there is a place for that, but not in an article about a first century work from the Levant. Nick Barnett (talk) 13:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure that there's any more recent complete translation of Josephus which is out of copyright than William Whiston's... AnonMoos (talk) 19:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The translation of the quotes
Talk:Synchronous orbit

message: That's not correct at all. A synchronous orbit depends on the rotational rate of the body being orbited. Kortoso (talk) 22:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simplified meaning? 

message: What is the focus of this article relative to tidal locking? What kind of things can this article cover that should not be covered by that article? --JorisvS (talk) 11:38, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: This article's focus?
Talk:Trans-lunar injection

message: The article currently reads, "...a trajectory which will intersect the Moon." Is that really correct? Doesn't "injection" refer to injecting the spacecraft into an orbit around the Moon? (sdsds - talk) 05:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Intersect is the correct word. Injection refers to the burn itself. --Abebenjoe 22:44, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intersect