NEXT

On Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 9:59:42 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 9:43:45 PM UTC-4, wrote:
http://dailypicksandflicks.com/wp-co...sportation.jpg

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j...33987824410380

http://www.fermliving.com/webshop/sh...e=&fl=redirect

On Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 9:59:42 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 9:43:45 PM UTC-4, wrote:
http://dailypicksandflicks.com/wp-co...sportation.jpg

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j...33987824410380

https://www.google.com/search?

https://goo.gl/pPCrJw

On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 10:19:50 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 6/9/2015 7:33 AM, John B. wrote:


Radio controlled golf balls.... ever tried to control something that
is 1.68" (or 1.62" if you are British) in size and traveling at 160
MPH?

Well, the U.S. Army is going beyond that. See
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ghanistan.html

For some reason your web page cannot be shown here in Thailand but I
found
http://valuealigned.com/new-us-army-...d-afghanistan/
which seems to be the same thing.

But those "radio controlled bullets" simply disintegrate when they
reach the designated distance.... probably not what one wants in a
golf game :-)

--
cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 08:57:30 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 18:33:00 +0700, John B.
wrote:

A real golfer would be saying things like, "Gee, I noticed when you
hit that shot into the bunker that you raised your head just as you
hit the ball", or "By gorry, that was a good shot. Think you can do it
again?"

A real mechanical engineer would say something like "I can make the
ball fly faster, more accurately, or cheaper, pick any two". The
industrial engineer would say "Looks like the human to golf club
interface is far from ergonomic or optimum. Some human factors
redesign will improve consistency and accuracy". Some of my friends
might ask "How can we cheat at this game and make a killing on
wagers"? A land developer might say "I wonder how many condos I can
build on this oversized lawn". The first step to solving a problem is
to define the problem. My problem was "What can I do to keep from
falling asleep?"

To a point:
http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/211_fall2002.web.dir/josh_fritts/flight.html
Too much spin and the range is shorter. Please note that I didn't
care much about range. It was accuracy that I was trying to achieve.

That is a tactic that many women use. They can't hit it very far but
they can hit it straight so they go bump, bump, bump down the fairway
and end up one over par. Meanwhile their husband hits it a mile....
out in the bushes and takes three shots to get back and ends up with
two over par :-) The clever women seldom mention this until the game
is over, the scores totted up, and it is time to pay off the bets :-)

If my observations are correct, most of the men are drunk on the
course, while a much lesser percentage of women are intoxicated. The
men seem to be there to show off to each other, while the women are
there to cash in. Different objectives require different strategies.

I can add some aerodynamic drag to the men's drivers so that the ball
doesn't go quite as far. Presumably, that might improve their
accuracy. However, I doubt anyone would pay money for such a club.
Adding control surfaces to the club shaft would provide the necessary
accuracy. A video camera in the club head would recognize the ball
and home in on it using the control surfaces as a rudder. Dead center
contact between the ball and club face would be guaranteed. If it
could be operated by an inebriated duffer, it would probably sell at
any price. Investors can inquire at the address below.

http://videos.howstuffworks.com/discovery/39251-mythbusters-dimpled-car-minimyth-video.htm
http://www.fordgt500.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=11243&stc=1&d=13408828 29

I am not a aficionado of Myth Busters but automobile makers do spend
considerable effort to make their automobiles more streamlined as it
results in better gas mileage which seems to be a rather important
feature in auto sales at the moment.

If the Mythbusters video clip is believed, then streamlining is
counterproductive beyond some point. I consider streamlining a fad
and somewhat undesirable. If all the car makers seriously adopt the
various government regulations, rules, restrictions, demands, edicts,
and threats of fines, then all cars would look roughly the same. That
could easily be a disaster in an industry that relies heavily on
fashion, style, and designed obsolescence for sales. A dimpled
surface just might be an advantage if it supplies the necessary
product differentiation as well as a few gas mileage points.


Well, "streamlining" seems to work on "boat tailed" bullets at least
up to 3,000 fps, and likely even faster, say 2045.454545455 MPH or
more. Damn, my Toyota won't go that fast :-)


Actually there have been a lot of small improvements in the golf
equipment.

Of course. Changes in fashions, color, texture, labeling, packaging,
sponsor, celebrity endorsements, warranty terms, and plugging unfair
advantage holes, have always been required to provide the necessary
illusions of progress. However, the fundamental design and function
of the basic tools of the game have not changed for 100+ years. One
still tries to smash the ball through an obstacle course with a nearly
useless example of inappropriate technology that requires years of
training to master and which fails to take advantage of modern
aerodynamic and missile guidance technologies.


Not really. for example, the change from wooden to metal heads meant
that the player had better control of the ball, there were a number of
changes to the ball that improved either distance or controllability.
In fact, if you were to "build a better mouse trap", i.e. a better
club, the USGA and the R&A might not let you use them in a sanctioned
match.

Pro scores keep improving and they keep increasing the
length of the holes.

That's another reason why I wasn't interested in improving distance. I
suppose it would be possible to extend the handicap system to the
equipment, where professionals would be required to play with
overweight balls.

Nope, the existing handicap system works well. The company I worked
for in Indonesia had a contract (with a steel mill) to supply a Golf
Professional, although he was described in the contract as a "golf
course equipment consultant" and I used to play with him, and with my
handicap even beat him occasionally.

Radio controlled golf balls.... ever tried to control something that
is 1.68" (or 1.62" if you are British) in size and traveling at 160
MPH?

No. I have enough trouble controlling a quadcopter. The difficult
part is adjusting to the idea that there's no frame of reference as to
what constitutes "forward" in a quadcopter. Controlling a golf ball
simply extends the problem from 2 dimensions to 3 dimensions (or 4 if
I include spin control).

I hadn't planned to fly the balls with a joystick. It was my
intention of offer a consumerized version of the military smart
munitions. The ordinance adjusts its trajectory in accordance to a
suitable target designator, in this case, the image of a standard golf
hole. Initially, it could be done with an oscillating mass gyroscope,
similar to what stabilizes satellites, which is controlled by a
computah from the ground, which knows the location of both itself and
the target. Later, I would add close in visual target location
refinements. If I wanted to cheat, an IR heat source in the hole.

Well rather than all that expensive electronic equipment, with the
resultant discussions about batteries and hub generator, golfers,
years ago devised a better scheme. A simple hole in the pants
pocket.... allowed one to place the ball just about anywhere that it
was wanted :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On 6/9/2015 11:44 PM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 10:19:50 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 6/9/2015 7:33 AM, John B. wrote:


Radio controlled golf balls.... ever tried to control something that
is 1.68" (or 1.62" if you are British) in size and traveling at 160
MPH?

Well, the U.S. Army is going beyond that. See
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ghanistan.html

For some reason your web page cannot be shown here in Thailand but I
found
http://valuealigned.com/new-us-army-...d-afghanistan/
which seems to be the same thing.

But those "radio controlled bullets" simply disintegrate when they
reach the designated distance.... probably not what one wants in a
golf game :-)

:-) Back when I was trying to play golf, I might have been glad of that!


--
- Frank Krygowski

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/env...th-the-drought

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 00:47:06 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 6/9/2015 11:44 PM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 10:19:50 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 6/9/2015 7:33 AM, John B. wrote:


Radio controlled golf balls.... ever tried to control something that
is 1.68" (or 1.62" if you are British) in size and traveling at 160
MPH?

Well, the U.S. Army is going beyond that. See
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ghanistan.html

For some reason your web page cannot be shown here in Thailand but I
found
http://valuealigned.com/new-us-army-...d-afghanistan/
which seems to be the same thing.

But those "radio controlled bullets" simply disintegrate when they
reach the designated distance.... probably not what one wants in a
golf game :-)

:-) Back when I was trying to play golf, I might have been glad of that!


Well for sure, you would never have a hole in one to brag about :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:44:56 +0700, John B.
wrote:

But those "radio controlled bullets" simply disintegrate when they
reach the designated distance.... probably not what one wants in a
golf game :-)

Yep. With a real golf ball, the ballistics solution is a three
dimensional problem, where the altitude, azimuth, and range are all
controlled by the golfer. However, with a radio controlled bullet,
only the distance is controlled. Unless the military device can stop
the projectile directly over the golf hole, it's useless for golfing.

Also, disintegrating golf balls have already been invented and are
commonly available:
http://explodinggolfballs.com/index.php?session_id=1433951463278&submit=true&cat egory=Novelty_Golf_Balls
http://www.amazon.com/JP-Lann-Exploding-Golf-Ball/dp/B004DM2UXQ
If golfers spend good money on such rubbish, surely they would be
interested in GPS guided golf balls, golf club accuracy enhancements,
mm wave (radar?) ballistic profilers, and terrain insensitive gyro
stabilized balls.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 11:56:06 AM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:44:56 +0700, John B.
wrote:

But those "radio controlled bullets" simply disintegrate when they
reach the designated distance.... probably not what one wants in a
golf game :-)

Yep. With a real golf ball, the ballistics solution is a three
dimensional problem, where the altitude, azimuth, and range are all
controlled by the golfer. However, with a radio controlled bullet,
only the distance is controlled. Unless the military device can stop
the projectile directly over the golf hole, it's useless for golfing.

Also, disintegrating golf balls have already been invented and are
commonly available:
http://explodinggolfballs.com/index.php?session_id=1433951463278&submit=true&cat egory=Novelty_Golf_Balls
http://www.amazon.com/JP-Lann-Exploding-Golf-Ball/dp/B004DM2UXQ
If golfers spend good money on such rubbish, surely they would be
interested in GPS guided golf balls, golf club accuracy enhancements,
mm wave (radar?) ballistic profilers, and terrain insensitive gyro
stabilized balls.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN


for a man not liking golf you sure spend a lotta time dwelling on it

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:55:28 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

for a man not liking golf you sure spend a lotta time dwelling on it

I don't like to play golf. I do like to design the hardware.
Actually, I think I'm doing rather well for someone who has played
exactly 1 game (18 holes) and knows little about how the game is
played. Some of my most creative ideas come from total ignorance,
which offers the benefit of not knowing that it won't work, can't be
done, or was invented 100 years ago.

I suppose it would be tactless to remind you who started this golfing
threat.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558