>> ^Yogi:

I remember watching this clip dickity six years ago. Seems like the apparatus would weigh too much even for cars back in those days.

With the technology of the 60s, this would definitely be to heavy and fairly impractical. I have no idea how this prototype worked but with modern motors and hydraulics this seems like a pretty good idea, especially considering the lack of parking in major cities. The parking problem is the only reason to own a Smart Car after all. With the ridiculous size of many cars now days this might actually help quite a bit, allowing people to park in spaces that their cars will fit but can't possibly maneuver into.

Cool, but seems like a lot of work for not much payoff.



Or you could just get one of these.

nervous system is hydraulic too. it's all about fluid and membranes

try eating what grows out of the poo

Those are some sick car hydraulics.

Congratulations! Your video, Bad Idea: using a hydraulic hammer to demolish a building, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 34 Badge!

Your video, Bad Idea: using a hydraulic hammer to demolish a building, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I think the idea is just that a hydraulic hammer requires you to be in close proximity to the thing your demolishing. I'd say that when demolishing a building, standing at least as far away as the height of the building is probably a good rule of thumb.

*snuff?

Can someone that isn't an idiot about engineering explain to me why using a hydraulic hammer is a terrible idea?

I mean, I realize that standing in the shadow of anything that you're trying to make fall down is a stupid idea, but is it because you're guaranteed that its collapse will be larger than its own footprint?

>> ^kceaton1:

I've always wondered, would this work if the parking break is on? Or would it just destroy the parking break? Anyone know?


You can drive with your parking park on without to much fuss. It ain't great for it, but it won't explode into a thousand bits. For cases like this, the parking break is actually less strong than a automatic in park; the brake is just friction, the other is a hydraulic stop. The paint might suffer, even in the best case. It doesn't take but a few pounds of pressure to leave an imprint or scuff.

NANROD uses:
SARCASM!

It isn't very effective!


>> ^Payback:

>> ^nanrod:
They didn't want to seem pretentious by having a 5-bay garage.

Yes, having a massive hydraulic movable barn wall is MUCH less so...

>> ^nanrod:

They didn't want to seem pretentious by having a 5-bay garage.


Yes, having a massive hydraulic movable barn wall is MUCH less so...

Mmmm, Fresh produce sprinkled with diesel and hydraulic oils - what a great idea.

The price of real estate I suppose...

>> ^oritteropo:

I hope the cvr transcripts get translated into English and released >> ^therealblankman:
>> ^oritteropo:
I'm sure they were expecting a smoking crater and not the brilliantly successful landing we saw! If I hadn't heard about it before hand, I would've been expecting that from the start too!

>> ^Longswd:
Almost looks like he lost rudder control (hydraulic failure?) and was steering by varying engine thrust between the left/right engines. I wonder how many seat cushions had to be surgically removed after landing.

A little background: apparently this plane had been in storage for some years, taken out of retirement, refitted, etc. This was a test flight to make sure everything was working correctly- apparently not though. The oscillation started shortly after take-off and the pilot was able to circle the field and land safely- no passengers on board, but I'm sure the crew had to requisition new undergarments.



knowing Russia, I'm sure it's "fuck shit dick bitch motherfucker cunt fuck shit bitch" etc etc etc

I hope the cvr transcripts get translated into English and released >> ^therealblankman:

>> ^oritteropo:
I'm sure they were expecting a smoking crater and not the brilliantly successful landing we saw! If I hadn't heard about it before hand, I would've been expecting that from the start too!

>> ^Longswd:
Almost looks like he lost rudder control (hydraulic failure?) and was steering by varying engine thrust between the left/right engines. I wonder how many seat cushions had to be surgically removed after landing.

A little background: apparently this plane had been in storage for some years, taken out of retirement, refitted, etc. This was a test flight to make sure everything was working correctly- apparently not though. The oscillation started shortly after take-off and the pilot was able to circle the field and land safely- no passengers on board, but I'm sure the crew had to requisition new undergarments.

>> ^oritteropo:

I'm sure they were expecting a smoking crater and not the brilliantly successful landing we saw! If I hadn't heard about it before hand, I would've been expecting that from the start too!


>> ^Longswd:

Almost looks like he lost rudder control (hydraulic failure?) and was steering by varying engine thrust between the left/right engines. I wonder how many seat cushions had to be surgically removed after landing.


A little background: apparently this plane had been in storage for some years, taken out of retirement, refitted, etc. This was a test flight to make sure everything was working correctly- apparently not though. The oscillation started shortly after take-off and the pilot was able to circle the field and land safely- no passengers on board, but I'm sure the crew had to requisition new undergarments.