excuse me, I mean "tale"....
The O'Bannon was a general quarters, so there were no "unoccupied" sailors available to throw potatoes at the sub. So, the Captains' account is the more accurate of the tail.
For Pete's sake, didn't these three clowns know it is illegal to feed the animals???
DaFox wrote:
The reason that AC if preferred over DC for transmitting electrical power is that AC is cheaper and simpler to increase or decrease voltage for transmission and usage. A simple transformer will do that. So, long transmission lines utilize very high AC voltages for transmission (reducing current thus reducing transmission losses for equal power delivery). Whether AC or DC, equal current will produce basically equal transmission losses. Double the voltage, and you reduce the current by half for a given power transfer, thus reducing transmission losses.
The reason that AC if preferred over DC for transm... (
show quote)
The 700 mile DC power line that started all this is reducing line losses by transmitting very high voltage, so that transmission current is very low, thus line losses will be very low. Why DC was chosen is probably due to the economics of wind turbine generators.
f8bengal wrote:
Not a 700 mile DC power line!! How many times do they have to prove that Edison was wrong about DC current, and that AC transmission is the only way to go? Do we have to have to have the Chicago World's Fair all over again? Resistance losses in a DC line that distance won't leave enough juice to run a one-slice toaster by the time it gets to Tennessee. Not only that but Tennessee is still running on depression-era TVA dam projects and cut-rate power rates that the rest of us are still paying for.
Not only that but the enviro-wackos stopped another hydro dam in Tennessee because it might upset a 2" long minnow call the snail darter. So, now Oklahoma is going to kill millions of eagles and other endangered birds so that Tennessee won't have to irritate the snail darters, pay much higher power rates for the privilege and still have to have redundant coal/gas power on standby. Doing nothing.
Am I sounding cynical?
Not a 700 mile DC power line!! How many times do ... (
show quote)
The reason that AC if preferred over DC for transmitting electrical power is that AC is cheaper and simpler to increase or decrease voltage for transmission and usage. A simple transformer will do that. So, long transmission lines utilize very high AC voltages for transmission (reducing current thus reducing transmission losses for equal power delivery). Whether AC or DC, equal current will produce basically equal transmission losses. Double the voltage, and you reduce the current by half for a given power transfer, thus reducing transmission losses.
thomseninc wrote:
I'm pretty (i.e., very) sure I remember this: In a DC circuit, power (in watts) = volts x amps. So, (according to the article) 4,000 MW = 600 kV x current in amps, or current = 6,666 amps.
I believe that 4000MW is 4,000,000,000 watts (MW equal million watts) Now, do the math: i=600KV divided by the 4,000MWs.
The math is i=p/e, or i=600x10,000/4000,000,000. Which equals 150 micro amps. That is the only way that DC can be transmitted without very high losses (e.g. low current). It would be interesting to find out how they will convert it to AC on the receiving end.
My experience is that it quits when it 'thinks' that it cannot print another of the same size printout.
I have an Epson 3800, which is similar to your 3880. I keep using the printer until it requires an ink change, which can be quite a few printouts later. BTW, I love my 3800!
That was developed by an outfit called "Animusic", and if you google it, you can buy their DVD. I have two of theirs, and it still blows my mind when I play them.
Hi Cloverleaf: I can't help you much on the camera or lens selection, but my wife has wet macular degeneration which started out as the dry variety. I assume you are afflicted with the dry ARMD? Wife's experience was she went from wavy vision to almost blind in a few days. She now gets a shot in her 'good' eye every 4 to 6 weeks ('bad' eye is pretty useless), and that brought back some vision so she is quite functional selectively, but still legally blind (can't drive, has some color differentiation problems, cannot recognize faces or much small detail etc.) My point is that if you haven't discussed the possibility of your eye going 'wet' with your optometrist, please consider it and have a plan that you can execute rapidly if needed. On the brighter side, dry ARMD usually stays that way, only about 10% go 'wet'. Good Luck.