Re: OT: Repeatably lobbing "projectiles"

On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 21:37:35 +0100, Jeroen Belleman
<jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

On 11/22/24 20:36, Anass Luca wrote:

bp@www.zefox.net wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

Most "guns" just want to achieve a "maximum" (range,
load, etc.)

>
Not sure I understand what you're getting at here. On
the face of it that statement seems mistaken.

 
You are interacting with "Don Y".  If you go review other postings
where "Don Y" has initiated a thread like this one you will find that
the "Don Y" poster quite effectively trolls the group every single
time.  The initial post is always ambigious and seriously lacking in
necessary details, such that 234+ wrong possibilities could be seen by
readers.  And as others in the group request details to try to gain an
understanding from the vague, detail lacking initial post, they are
slowly tricked out over the course of days and plural postings from
"Don Y", intermixed with numerous random asides to maximize confusion.
Meanwhile, as the supposed details are trickled out, the apparent
requirements needed also shift as posters appear to gain any
understanding in order to keep the responders in the dark and allow the
"Don Y" trolling articles to continue to troll everyone who responds.

That is unfortunately a rather accurate characterization, I concede.
Jeroen Belleman

You give up too easily.  Most people can solve an engineering problem
if they are given accurate specifications and objectives.  In my
limited experience, I've never received all the necessary information.
In the few times when I did receive accurate specifications and
objectives, the client was made endless changes and "enhancements"
until little clue as to what he wanted and somewhat less on what I was
expected to accomplish.  Over the years, I've deduced that this
typical and that Don Y is a good model for my typical client.

Still, something can be done with the muddle.  The first step is to
determine what problem Don Y is attempting to solve.  Don Y does a
tolerable job of providing a partial solution, but without a clue what
problem his partial solution is intended to solve, his partial
solution is at best a moving target.  My guess(tm) is that it does
nothing useful, so this initial step can be ignored.

The next step is to determine what we have to work with.  Since there
are no specifications except for 20 ft range, the launcher and
projectile can be almost anything.  A 40 ft diameter ball would do the
job and never miss the target.  However, that's probably not what Don
Y is expecting.  A smaller ball, with a 20 ft steel wire attached,
would also work.  The 20 ft steel wire limits the flight distance to a
20 ft radius.  Then the steel wire become taught, the small ball fall
straight down and into the target receptacle.  Elevation and azimuth
can be stabilized by spinning the ball, switching to pointed
projectile, or both.  Using two steel wires to form a triangle, will
eliminate the need for spin or fin stabilization.

At this point, I usually would present my worst and most ludicrous
ideas to the client, who would immediately being crying, screaming or
yelling.  Since that clients endless changes and meddling have dragged
the estimated delivery date far too close to the deadline, the client
has to select something.  It's at this time that he gets serious about
defining specifications (with my assistance).  The rest of the project
is comparatively easy and consists mostly of lost weekends and lack of
sleep.

I could go on, but it's raining, the lights are flickering, and I
suspect that I'll loose power shortly.







--
Jeff Liebermann                 jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272      http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann      AE6KS    831-336-2558