Miscellaneous desk
< May 15	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 17 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 16[edit]

British Submarines[edit]

What class of submarine preceded the Oberon Class in the Royal and Royal Australian navies?220.253.137.223 (talk) 01:36, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Our article Oberon class submarine states that they were preceeded by the Porpoise class. Nanonic (talk) 01:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under a train[edit]

Something that happens occasionally in the movies is the hero lies down between the rails and a train passes harmlessly above them. In reality could you actually do this, or are there some dangly bits hanging under a train that would make it impossible to survive? Astronaut (talk) 02:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Needless to say it'd be a very bad idea, but this guy seems to manage it — Matt Eason ^{(Talk  Contribs)} 02:51, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has happened a few times in recent memory (a year or two ago a guy in either New York or Boston jumped onto the subway tracks where an epileptic was having a fit and forced them down and both were totally safe). It depends no doubt on the model of train in question. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 03:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've always been told that the hoses and chains hanging down would kill you if they hit you at high speed. Also the locomotive is likely to have a piece extending quite close to the rails (to sweep things off the tracks and prevent derailment) which would crush you. On old steam locomotives it was called the pilot or "cowcatcher." Edison (talk) 03:55, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) There was a guy in the UK last year who tried to do it, showing off in front of his friends after an afternoon in the pub. The emergency services were finding body parts all down the track for the next couple of weeks. Not a good idea.--KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 04:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Googling "train passed over him" yields some interesting results.--80.3.133.3 (talk) 17:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've been seeing videos of teenagers lying down under trains for kicks recently. No ill effects observed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.103.68 (talk) 20:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The other videos are harder to find. (But is anyone else reminded of Penn & Teller and "Dear Janet"?) —Tamfang (talk) 22:48, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the train, it would either kill you or not, and there is really no way to know in advance. So as a plot element, it is possible, but it would not be an advisable thing to do. Prodego ^talk 14:45, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A high-speed train (like the French TGV or Spanish AVE) will probably kill you. Not only because they could be too low to leave you space to survive, but they could drag you in the turbulence left behind when the pass. Mr.K. (talk) 11:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the late forties/early fifties Brian Johnston broadcast live lying down between the tracks as a train passed over him for the radio show In Town Tonight. See [1]. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:21, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to all the points mentioned above, it also matters how high the rails are (they're not the same everywhere) and how thick you are. If you were actually in an emergency situation where there was no time to get across the rail, as in the New York incident mentioned above, lying down between the rails gives you a chance to survive. But any other option is better. --Anonymous, 08:25 UTC, May 22, 2009.

archictect[edit]

here in wikipedia, it's written that an architct is one who plans and designs buildings. the pic beside it shows a man drawing the structure of the building. well.... is this what architects do? design the structure on a sheet of paper and then supervise the construction?? is there anything... more practical to this profession?? i searched wiki for branches of architecture but couldn't find it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.50.135.94 (talk) 04:36, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is actually what they do. Actually, very practical to the people who have to build the structure. If they didn't have a plan, imagine what the building would be like.--KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 04:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And of course in preparing the plans the architect has to have an indepth knowledge of the construction methods to be used, which materials to construct with and their stress tolerances as well as having an understanding of both the clients needs and the building code regulations or planning regulations of the area. In many builds, the architect also has some project management functions and is the focal point for both the client and construction contractors for any queries over materials, sourcing of items, siting and any decoration. Nanonic (talk) 04:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In building a building, some of the other key people involved include engineers (who work on the structural end of things) and the builders (who put the material together according to the plans and instructions of the architects and the engineers). --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 05:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While many or most architects still do sketches on paper, technology allows them to access stored plans, materials specifications according to code and other tools while designing a building using a computer. In addition they can use video imaging and photographs of the site to show their clients what their new building would look like. The actual drafting work would usually be done by a draftsman or graphics specialist. How much "hands on" work an architect will do depends on the size of his/her office, the type of building they design, the project they are working on and the career path chosen by the architect in question. The field is very varied. This page on some continuing education opportunities may help you catch a tiny glimpse on some of the things architects can deal with. [2] 71.236.24.129 (talk) 08:09, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking as an architect, the drawing on a piece of paper part is no longer very significant. Almost all work is done on a computer using software like AutoCAD or MicroStation. The architect is responsible for leading a team of structural, mechanical, electrical and civil engineers, as well as acoustical consultants, interior designers, lighting specialists, data consultants and others, depending on the scope and scale of the project. Design work is gradually migrating to parametric design tools like Revit, where the building is modeled in detail in three dimensions, with all attributes of materials, colors, quality,and so on modeled in the software. The architect is also responsible from the very beginning for working to (and sometimes writing) the design program that defines the characteristics of the desired product. This is followed by increasingly detailed documents, moving from schematic design, design development, and finally the construction documents that are used to build the structure. Specifications (usually a very thick book) accompany the drawings. The architect will then have a role in the bidding or pricing (having provided estimates during the design process) and will review contractor submittals for materials and monitor construction as the structure is built.

As for the "practical" end, most architects have (or should have) some degree of construction experience; spending a year or two administering a large construction project tends to be a comprehensive exposure to practical construction, but not all firms are set up to allow the designers to deal with construction too. There are some architects who do their own contracting, usually in residential work or interiors.Acroterion _(talk) 15:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What has killed more americans, Swine Flu or Clowns?[edit]

Who has been responsible for the most deaths of american people over the years, swine flu or clowns? Note: I am already aware of the Yarmouth Bridge Disaster but this was in the uk and it is hard to be certain that the clown was indeed the killer or in the wrong place at the wrong time. Catoutofthebag (talk) 13:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Current swine flu outbreak: 4, John Wayne Gacy: 33. --Sean 15:00, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{EC} If you're only talking about the recent outbreak of swine flu, that's easy. According to our article, Swine Flu has only killed 7 Americans. John Wayne Gacy alone killed 33 Americans. Clowns win, hands down. However, if you're talking all-time, probably swine flu. The 1918 flu pandemic killed 50 to 100 million people world-wide, but I'm not sure how many of them were Americans. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 15:04, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's far from certain that the Spanish Flu originated in pigs (although pigs are involved in one theory). It was the H1N1 strain, the same as the current outbreak, but that doesn't mean it reached humans in the same way. See Spanish flu research for details. However, if it was, our article says: In the U.S., about 28% of the population suffered, and 500,000 to 675,000 died. --Tango (talk) 15:13, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After some thought, I think I need to be a little clearer: "Swine flu" is just a name given to the specific virus responsible for the current outbreak, the name really doesn't mean much. "Swine flu" has little more to do with pigs than "Spanish flu" had to do with Spain. They are just names used for convenience ("the 2009 outbreak of the H1N1 strain of Influenza A" just doesn't have the same ring to it!). It is pretty meaningless to group together deaths from different flu outbreaks, even if their origins did both involve pigs - they aren't the same virus. --Tango (talk) 15:27, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Though I would assume that the OP was speaking solely of this most recent strain, regardless of the involvement of pigs. Or else the question would be kind of moot, as regular flu kills 1000x(approx) more people each year than clowns does. --Saddhiyama (talk) 15:49, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should I avoid clowns showing symptoms of swine flu? --82.70.152.142 (talk) 00:59, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. Avoid pigs showing symptoms of clown flu. That's what we're all doing now, isn't it?--KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 01:17, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder how well a custard pie functions as a surgical mask... --Tango (talk) 01:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Between 1990 and 2005, 69 people died from asphyxiating on balloons. I wonder how many of those were balloon animals? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.168.11 (talk) 22:30, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm under the impression that Gacy wasn't a professional clown, he only occasionally performed for friends and family, and I don't think he killed people in his clown getup either, so I'm not sure he ought to count. Are there any others? All the other killer clowns I can think of are fictional—Pennywise, the Joker, Ronald McDonald... -- BenRG (talk) 23:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you restrict it to murders by someone actually dressed as a clown at the time that is going to dramatically reduce the numbers, perhaps to the point where swine flu is back in the running. --Tango (talk) 00:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to suggest Kim de Gelder, but apparently he wasn't made up like The Joker after all. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can not only consider murder. If a clown is involved in a fatal car accident, that would also score one for the clowns. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 15:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Especially if all 18 clowns in the car perish. -- Coneslayer (talk) 18:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]