this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2024
400 points (98.8% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6625 readers
707 users here now

A community for your defence shitposting needs

Rules

1. Be niceDo not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.

2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes

If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.

3. Content must be relevant

Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.

4. No racism / hatespeech

No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.

5. No politics

We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.

6. No seriousposting

We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.

7. No classified material

Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.

8. Source artwork

If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.

9. No low-effort posts

No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.

10. Don't get us banned

No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.

11. No misinformation

NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.


Join our Matrix chatroom


Other communities you may be interested in


Banner made by u/Fertility18

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] neidu2@feddit.nl 29 points 10 months ago (2 children)

To me it was F14. F15 is cool and all, but... I definitely saw Top Gun while way too young.

[–] Enk1@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I mean, even without watching Top Gun the retractable wings were the coolest thing ever for a kid. It was the aviation equivalent of Mad Max flipping on the supercharger on the V8 Interceptor.

(I know, I know. You can't actually spin up a supercharger like that, but it's still fuckin cool.)

[–] grue@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago (4 children)

(I know, I know. You can’t actually spin up a supercharger like that, but it’s still fuckin cool.)

Technically you could design a supercharger with a clutch (like the one for the car's A/C compressor) , but it'd be dumb because there's no good reason not to have it active all the time.

[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago

Superchargers come with massive parasitic losses, in many cases 10-20%, and there’s a decent handful of cars with clutches on the supercharger pulley. The MR2 is one.

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Not running the extra 20kg or whatever of rotating blower mass would increase efficiency for cruising. A supercharger doesn't have a good way of doing active bypass when you don't need boost like a turbo wastegate so just turning it off can save some mpgs.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If the size of the turbo on my VW is anything to go by, I think the rotating mas of an automotive supercharger would be more likely on the order of 2 kg, not 20 kg. In my mind, that has two implications: (a) the gain from bothering to disable it is perhaps not actually all that significant, and (b) the additional mass that would come with attaching a clutch to it might be large compared to the total mass you're trying to control, so maybe it wouldn't be worth it. Then again, the Previa supercharger the other reply gave (which certainly wouldn't be a very large supercharger) might be a counterexample...

[–] SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz 3 points 9 months ago

Turbos spin far faster than (Roots-type) superchargers, and can therefore be much smaller.

Besides that, I don't think rotating mass is really the issue. Yes, more inertia is like having a bigger flywheel so the engine will be slower to spin up/down, but that doesn't consume much energy, especially in steady-state cruising.

Superchargers compress air - that takes energy. You then restrict it through the throttle body, because you're not cruising with a wide-open throttle. That throws away all the compression.

You also have pumping losses and bearing/gear/belt losses.

[–] Enk1@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

With a Roots style supercharger like the 8-71 on Mad Max's, if the supercharger isn't spinning then there's no path for air to enter the engine. You'd have to implement another full-size throttle body as a bypass to allow enough airflow into the engine when the supercharger isn't rotating. SCs are very parasitic, hence their use mostly being limited to larger displacement engines that have sufficient low-end torque offset the draw. You could definitely resolve this with a clutched pulley and a bypass throttle-body, the complexity, space requirements, and engineering needed to make it work isn't worth it. Multi-sized sequential triple turbos are clearly the superior solution to boost at any RPM.

[–] lemming741@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

This kind of makes me want a Previa. And not for the first time, either: it's a thought I have at least once a year or so. Maybe I should finally act on it.

The main reason, aside from the fact that I actually kinda like minivans, is that I want to be able to tell people I drive a manual-transmission, supercharged, mid-engine, AWD car. And then after they try to guess what kind of Italian supercar it is, I can say "Nope! It's an old Toyota minivan! 🤪"

It's just unfortunate that AFAIK you can't get all three of those features (manual, supercharger, AWD) on any single Previa -- the trim levels were arranged such that they only ever came with at most two of the three. So I'd have to get a automatic '97 S/C AWD and then do a transmission swap on it.

[–] Enk1@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

I definitely haven't spent countless hours thinking about how you could have a mechanically activated clutch on a supercharger pulley. Nope. Not at all.

[–] this_1_is_mine@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Funny story. Nowadays you could feaseably run a dual forced air like turbo and super charging and use an electric clutch to disengage the super. But the intake would be convoluted with some way to bypass the stupid charger or the turbo depending on rpm. it just makes it not worth it.

[–] Bananigans@lemmings.world 8 points 10 months ago (3 children)

In real life conversation I'd laugh and pretend I understood that. I'm glad the internet makes ignorance more comfortable.

[–] MajesticSloth@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

I also didn't understand that.

High five

[–] Enk1@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Imagine you're breathing through a big straw, and at the other end of the straw is a device that pumps air faster whenever you're breathing faster, say when you're running fast. If you turn off power to the pump, you can't breathe through the straw anymore because the pump isn't spinning, so you'd need a second straw that opens up only when the pump is off.

You are the engine, and the pump is the supercharger. When the engine doesn't need to breathe fast, turning off the supercharger would conserve energy use at the expense of power output. But the design of the pump doesn't let air bypass it when it's off, so you'd need to engineer something (overly complex) to do it.

[–] anonymoose@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago

Hahah yeah, that stupid charger.....

[–] 0ops@lemm.ee 4 points 9 months ago

Me, an intellectual, bypassing the stupid charger

[–] kersploosh@sh.itjust.works 14 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I'm told that I first learned to swear by watching Top Gun with my older siblings. Dad was impressed that I even used the words correctly in context. Mom was not happy at all.