search results matching tag: tapping

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (363)     Sift Talk (16)     Blogs (22)     Comments (1000)   

MagLev Trains Pass At 700 km/hour (434.96 mph)

BSR says...

Stop the video at 1:09 and then tap the period key to advance frame by frame. I believe it's the repeating design of the train and the sync of the video that causes the illusion. Camera vs naked eye is like digital vs analog. Pattern vs blur.

BTW, put some underwear on your eyes, please.

DataSchmuck said:

There's a weird ripple effect going on in the top left corner of the window when it passes. Can anyone explain what that is? I'm guessing something to do with frame-rate of the camera vs speed of the passing train? Or would you see it with the naked eye?

Dilly Dilly

oritteropo says...

More often than not it's just used as a nonsense word. See this 17C example for instance:

Lavender's blue, dilly dilly, lavender's green,
When I am king, dilly dilly, you shall be queen:
Who told you so, dilly dilly, who told you so?
'Twas mine own heart, dilly dilly, that told me so.
Call up your men, dilly dilly, set them to work,
Some with a rake, dilly dilly, some with a fork;
Some to make hay, dilly dilly, some to thresh corn,
Whilst you and I, dilly dilly, keep ourselves warm.

If you should die, dilly dilly, as it may hap,
You shall be buried, dilly dilly, under the tap;
Who told you so, dilly dilly, pray tell me why?
That you might drink, dilly dilly, when you are dry.


In the context of this video, see http://www.kansascity.com/news/nation-world/article181006346.html

CrushBug said:

WTF does Dilly Dilly mean?

Vox explains bump stocks

newtboy says...

Confusion, no. Misdirection, absolutely. You said quite clearly you can keep up a 300rpm rate for long periods, indefinitely. Now you admit at best you shoot at (not hit) 45 targets in that time, double tapping. Your bullshit contention was that, because at best you can pull the trigger twice in .12 seconds that you can actually accuire, aim, and shoot 600rpm. You knew that's bullshit, not confusion but lies. (The truth being that you still max out at <2 rps)
So have a nice day.

harlequinn said:

"First you claimed .2 second split is 300 rpm, now you say it's 90rpm. I'm so over this. Have fun at the range. "

Ahh I see the confusion. I should have been clearer.

I'm reporting two different rates - max theoretical, and actual with aiming and magazine changes.

So using splits alone on an unlimited mag, 0.2 split is 300 rpm.

Using that same 0.2 split with fixed aiming time of 1 second per target and two mag changes (30 round mags) you'll get approximately 90 rounds per minute actual.

Etc. as per my other examples.

It's good to hear you've been shooting that long. If you've been doing it that long you must still enjoy it - which is great.

Vox explains bump stocks

newtboy says...

I mixed up your two fire rates (.2 and .12) still you said you can keep up 5rps for many minutes (10 for a short time) not 3...."My lazy firing rate has splits (time between shots) of approximately 0.2 seconds. I can do that for a long time (many minutes before I slow done). That is a rate of 300 rounds per minute. My fast splits are approximately 0.12 seconds. I can't do that for very long (probably one magazine). That is a rate of 600 rounds per minute." And that's only really 300rpm if you have a 300 round mag.

....wait...why am I wasting my time on this? It's clear you're not comparing Apple's to Apple's.
You didn't come close to convincing me that manual 120 shots per minute at 400 yards all well aimed is believable...even belt fed. Keep in mind he actually averaged hitting one moving person in the dark at 400 yards per second for 10 minutes. Your generous competition numbers have you double tapping at 45 targets per min (without a hit rate given, or range).

First you claimed .2 second split is 300 rpm, now you say it's 90rpm. I'm so over this. Have fun at the range.
Again, the target was the crowd. He got more lead on that target on auto. No aim needed.
I've been shooting (non competitively) for 40 years btw, after rifle marksmanship courses for 3 years starting at 7...but thanks for the suggestion.

harlequinn said:

"You said almost 3 times that speed, continuously for over 10 minutes....and not with a lightweight speed shorting pistol."

You are not making any sense. I see what I wrote but it is unclear what you are referring to. You are welcome to quote the part you are referring to.

As I wrote above, you can choose the length of time you are aiming your firearm for. I even gave a comparative set of aiming scenarios.

I love how you take the top end of my approximation as your "laughable" scenario and don't mention the rest of the range (i.e. 50 rounds per minute with mag changes). Could you shoot at one round per second aimed? I think with a little training you could.

Doing 0.2 second splits (i.e. you shoot twice at each target) and taking about a second on every target, using 30 round mags, you can do 90 round per minute without much trouble. Going a little slower, say 0.3 second splits, and taking 1.5 seconds per target you can do about 60 round per minute. I could go on. The point is, these are aimed shots with a higher chance to hit the target, and with just as much chance to accidentally hit another target on a miss. This has the result of more hits on target.

"you get more hits on target in full auto".

No, you don't. On target means a hit near the point you intended on a target. He was getting random hits - as is evidenced by the low fatality rate versus high injury rate. The only way you would be correct was if you argued that he intended non-fatal injuries as much as he intended fatalities (and you're welcome to make that argument - it has some merits depending on what this lunatic was trying to achieve).

"If it's as common as you say, that should be easy to provide with a comparison video instead of a suggestion to buy and read a certain book. The videos I found are all short range small target, not at all the same as what we're debating. Show me a comparison of a field layered deep with 10000 balloons getting shot at from distance, that would be informative, short course accuracy target shooting isn't."

The book is good because it shows military statistics with full-auto versus other fire modes. Books are often better than videos. It also outlines military teaching methodology, include marksmanship and how it evolved over time. Full auto is still used in military engagements but you'll find it is used very sparsely (here is a good thread of military and ex-mil talking about it's uses: https://www.quora.com/Why-do-militaries-use-assault-rifles-when-the-full-auto-feature-is-rarely-ever-used )

Short range targets are easier to hit. Are you trying to prove my point? Long range targets are harder to hit. Your rate of randomly hitting targets does not get better at longer ranges. But aiming does increase your chance of hitting a target at any range.

If you really wanted to do a comparison at that range then the targets would be a lot larger than balloons.

You're arguing against established marksmanship knowledge that is readily available over the internet or in firearms courses.

I think you owe it to yourself to prove yourself right or wrong by doing some rifle marksmanship courses. Approach it as a sport and you'll have a lot fun doing it!!!

I can't chat much longer - thanks for the good discussion!

Tank Wave Man

Man hit by bus, acts as if nothing happened

When road rage goes terribly wrong

deathcow says...

I wouldn't dare to place blame in this video, but I gotta say the biker is totally stupid for thinking that, on a rolling motorcycle at hwy speeds that you should elect to kick a moving car instead of tapping your brakes.

How to drive a HMMWV in Iraq.

newtboy says...

They REALLY need a better horn, or better yet a siren if they're going to ignore all traffic laws and instead use off road racing rules, which are... to pass-honk, tap bumper, ramming speed, preferably in that order.

The Janitor Story From Crucial Accountability

Phreezdryd says...

Hey dumb-asses! Don't put your mouth on any surface in a public bathroom!

Reminds me of the Brita commercial that said if we drank unfiltered tap water we might as well be drinking out of the toilet.

eric3579 (Member Profile)

radx says...

Since election rigging is featured so often in the media these days, the lack of coverage of the class-action suit filed against the DNC becomes even more apparent. Luckily though, some some blogs are still on the case.

Appetizer:

Counsel for the DNC tap-danced around the judge’s initial line of questioning before finally answering that primary elections are “generally state funded.” But he left out how the Clinton campaign’s “takeover of national party structure” completely changes the context for “state funded.” Sure, there’s accounts with the state’s name on them, but the money was supplied by the Clinton campaign. At the very least, counsel for the DNC is being disingenuous when he says the DNC doesn’t fund state elections. In 2016 alone, FEC filings show that Florida received almost $22 million from DNC Services corp. How does that not constitute DNC funding?

Star Wars - Designing a Universe of Sound

Payback says...

I think one of the coolest things of my childhood was tapping one of the high-tension lines holding a telephone pole in place and discovering where he found the sound for the blasters.

One More Reason Marijuana Is Safer Than Alcohol

Will a drop of Water on the Anvil make it explode?

Asmo says...

Interesting tale, but smiths strike their anvils to insure that the hammerhead is pointing in the direction you strike. Hammer handles being round, over the course of hammering it's very easy for the head to slip out of alignment with the arm wielding it. So you tap the anvil with the hammer to straighten the face.

BLIP

ChaosEngine says...

I'm gonna jump on the "always wondered why this wasn't a thing" bandwagon too.

It seems like such an obvious and cheap idea, there must be a reason why it's not implemented.

I wonder if it's one of those things that sounds great in theory but has some terrible side effect in practice (e.g. maybe no-one pays attention to a short brake tap? I dunno)

Trump's Wiretapping Claims Destroyed By Comey

newtboy says...

What transcript of what conversation?! Trump claimed to have been tapped, based on a Fox report, based on an Alex Jones theory. No evidence, like a transcript of any conversations Trump has had, has ever been produced....none. I have o idea what you're talking about.
And Faux news itself had to do a special report clearly stating that they never received the tips Napolitano claimed they had received in his commentary implicating the British, and they have NO evidence he was ever under surveillance....full stop.
Napolitano's commentary was pure bullshit, and they've apparently (astonishingly) taken him off the air for spreading it.
"The Russians did it" is from the FBI....Comey's the name, inserting himself into politics is his game....but he's backed up by the heads of no less than 17 intelligence agencies on the Russian involvement claim.

greatgooglymoogly said:

Because I'm assuming that one of the parties to the conversation didn't just write a transcript of the conversation from memory and give it to someone else, to later be leaked.

I just happened to come across an interesting theory that is plausible(The Brits did it). From the Judge who has railed againt the unconstitutional NSA spying, so I don't think you can chalk this up to pure FOX news bullshit. In fact they took him off the air indefinitely for expressing his opinion. All of Comey's statements would still be truthful as well.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/03/16/andrew-napolitano-did-obama-spy-on-trump.html

Of course, just as I give little creedence to unsourced assertions that "The Russians did it" during the last administration, this will stay an interesting theory until the anonymous sources can deliver evidence.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon