Miscellaneous desk
< July 22	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 24 >

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.

July 23

where legs are amputated

I'm watching the very interesting vlog of "AmputeeOT" (an occupational therapist who recently lost a foot), and it occurs to me: one hears of amputation below or above the knee — how come I've never heard of amputation at the knee, i.e. keeping the whole femur but no bone below? —Tamfang (talk) 06:43, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible. The Gritti-Stokes amputation is an amputation done through the knee. It's mentioned at Amputation#Leg_amputations but there's no detail. I found a little via google. RudolfRed (talk) 07:05, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Coffee pod things

This is a very long shot, but I've been given a box of Dolce Gusto coffe pod type things, and I wonder if I can use them in a Nespresso home machine? --TammyMoet (talk) 12:39, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Our Dolce Gusto article states (unsourced) that "The Nestlé capsule systems are currently not compatible with each other, and each system requires different types of coffee capsules. Since the design is proprietary, these capsules are only available from the manufacturer." - Cucumber Mike (talk) 12:55, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We truly have an article on everything! Thanks Mike. --TammyMoet (talk) 15:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that they use the business model where they sell the coffee maker dirt cheap, perhaps even free, counting on selling you the pods at a steep markup, since there's no competition for their proprietary pods. (Of course, you can always throw the whole thing in the trash and get a cheaper system, once you realize the situation.) StuRat (talk) 18:33, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(this is a response to Cucumber Mike's post) Hmm, the second part of that sentence is wrong. Capsules are not only available from other manufacturers, but (at least in Europe) legitimately so, according to the recent decision of the English High Court in Nestec v Dualit. See e.g. this report. --19:04, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I had a suspicion that it might be incorrect (or at least only partially correct), which is why I qualified my answer by saying it was unsourced. In fact, the whole article is unsourced, except from the manufacturer's website. Still, I have removed the sentence in question from the article, and left a link to the above post. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 19:24, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hours and hours??

How many hours lasts a flight from San Francisco, CA to Dublin, Ireland? Miss Bono^[zootalk] 12:57, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.travelmath.com/flying-time/from/San+Francisco,+CA/to/Dublin,+Ireland says 10 hours, 41 minutes, assuming 500 mph with 30 minutes for take-off and landing. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:18, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any stopover? Miss Bono^[zootalk] 13:20, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The flight range is common but it appears there is no direct flight. Entering Dublin at http://timetables.oag.com/sfo2/ gives various options with total travel time of 13-14 hours, for example starting to London in 10 hours. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:49, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that in the case you traveling in a private jet, you don't have to make any stopover, right? Miss Bono^[zootalk] 13:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I don't know how common the distance is for private jets but some can do it. It's 8,200 km and a Gulfstream G550 has plenty of range with 12,500 km. If you lack the range then you may be able to at least get a shorter stopover. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

((edit conflict)). In that case, yes, you wouldn't have to stop. StewieCartman (talk) 14:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What about this plane MD-83 (as private)? is it fast? Miss Bono^[zootalk] 14:21, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer is: no, not really. It's in the article you reference under "Variants"

Thanks Bielle! :) can you suggest a faster plane? Miss Bono^[zootalk] 15:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gulfstream G650 appears to be the fastest civilian aircraft in operation today. It has the required range. At fast cruise speed of 595 mph it has range 11112 km. We only need 8200km so it could probably get closer to the max speed of 610 mph. At 600 mph with 30 minutes for take-off and landing it would take 9 hours according to http://www.travelmath.com/flying-time/from/San+Francisco,+CA/to/Dublin,+Ireland. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wao! Thank you very much, PrimeHunter and all of you guys!! You are amazing. Miss Bono^[zootalk] 16:27, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On regular commercial airlines there is currently no direct option between SFO and DUB. You will have to change somewhere: Atlanta, Chicago, London, etc. Depending on the routing and layover time, the trip can take 15-20 hours. Faster, viable options are a direct flight on a private jet or private charter; so an Airbus A380 cruises at 945 km/h so the same site mentioned above indicates a time of 9 h 11 m. Even faster, but a lot less viable for 'ordinary' people is a faster airplane; so Concorde (if it was still flying and was permitted to fly overland at cruising speed) would take under 4 hours, flying at mach 2. There are also various supersonic commercial/private aircraft projects under development with similar speeds to Concorde, and various military research projects for hypersonic aircraft (> mach 5). Astronaut (talk) 16:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Ordinary' people are 'civilians'? Miss Bono^[zootalk] 16:47, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. If you were rich enough to get a supersonic aircraft project off the ground, a civilian could fly on such an aircraft. But when it come to even faster, you would need to be a military test-pilot. Astronaut (talk) 16:51, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The supersonic Concordes were unable to get licenses to fly over the mainland, a large factor in their going out of business. Cross-Atlantic flights usually have a "standard" flight time which is greatly affected by head or tailwinds. μηδείς (talk) 17:05, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just want my character flights fast enough to see her bfriend who had a car accident, the man who is going with her (a friend of her boyfriend) is rich enough to have a private plane. Miss Bono^[zootalk] 17:07, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clearing things up... my questions here are not for real situations. I am not rich nor do I have a rich boyfriend, nor I am going to make a trip to ireland. I am writting a story and I am asking for advice. Miss Bono^[zootalk] 20:36, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this is about your pregnant passenger, things can get topsy-turvy. She might go into labour during the flight, before she or anyone else knows she is pregnant (that really happens!). Then because of time zoning, the birth day recorded on the ground could be on the day before she boarded the plane. And if it's twin babies and just one is born by midnight February 28th, his womb mate might get three birthday cakes before the other's first birthday. And if there's a miscarriage with any acusation that it was induced deliberately, Dublin is about the last place in Europe you would want to land. DreadRed (talk) 20:59, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a side note: There are some people who use a 747 or similar as a very high end luxury private plane. When I visited Lufthansa Technik in Hamburg, they were just redoing the interior design of a 747-400 for a Sheik who finally got a "real" plane - his previous one was a 747-200. But your character's boyfriend would have to be Bruce Wayne-rich, and then you can just take the Batplane. ;-) --Stephan Schulz (talk) 04:50, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hehehe, DreadRed, yes, it is about the pregnant passenger, I think I don't want the girl to have a miscarriage in Ireland for her own well. And, it is interesting that Feb 28th idea, mmm... Stephan Schulz, do we have an article on 747, my character's boyfriend is Paul McCartney-rich or maybe even more. Miss Bono^[zootalk] 12:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Sultan of Brunai not only owns a 747 as a personal transport - but likes to pilot it himself. SteveBaker (talk) 15:51, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you guys talkin' about this 747...? Miss Bono^[zootalk] 16:07, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed. Including master bedroom, showers, lounges, and all tastefully decorated with wooden veneer hand-buffed by former Rolls Royce workers (apparently only they have the knack to get the shine quite right to suggest understatement and immense wealth at the same time). No joke. But note that the list price of a current 747 is around US$ 35000000 - and that is empty. Even Paul McCartney would be hard-pressed to make that kind of investment (although he just about could). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 17:09, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's super cool! Stephan Schulz. What about Bono making that investment?? Miss Bono^[zootalk] 17:17, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also have a concern, the story has place in 2002. I don't think the 747 existed back then Miss Bono^[zootalk] 17:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about Bono's net worth, but the 747 first flew in 1970, so that's not a problem for you. You may confuse it with the Airbus A380, the currently largest civilian passenger jet. I don't know if there is a VIP version of the A380 yet. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 18:29, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, Stephan Schulz. So it will be a private 747 then... Miss Bono^[zootalk] 18:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A private 747 is, of course, a very flamboyant statement, more Meat Loaf or Alice Cooper than Sir Paul. If you want to keep it slightly less extreme, make it a temporary charter (e.g. for the latest and greatest world tour of your musician), not an outright buy. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:54, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, Stephan Schulz. Remember we are talking about someone with a similar personality to Bono's. Miss Bono^[zootalk] 12:13, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unidentified flying objects

I took the following pictures of some aircraft, mostly military, but they need identifying. Does anyone know what they are? Aircraft 2 and 3 are the same as is 6 and 7. Aircraft 1, aircraft 2, aircraft 3, aircraft 4, aircraft 5, aircraft 6 and aircraft 7. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 23:10, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you take these photos? Besides Canada. Howicus (talk) 23:16, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, 1 might be a McDonnell F-101 Voodoo. Howicus (talk) 23:18, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) By the number on the tail of #1, it appears to be a McDonnell CF-101 Voodoo, actually a CF-101B according to this book, which gives its history (at the Alberta Aviation Museum in 1998). Clarityfiend (talk) 23:20, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2/3 is a Avro Canada CF-100 Canuck -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 23:21, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

4 and 5 are both Canadair CT-133 Silver Stars. Howicus (talk) 23:24, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

6 / 7 is an HS.125-600, ~~owned by one George Trussell of Edmonton~~ (link). Tevildo (talk) 23:39, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, then, these photos were probably all taken at the Alberta Aviation Museum. Howicus (talk) 23:42, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't that mean Mr. Trussell was the photographer, not the owner? -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 23:44, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, sorry. Tevildo (talk) 23:47, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That was very fast. Yes I took all of them at the Alberta Aviation Museum last week. My apologies to all as I didn't look properly at http://www.albertaaviationmuseum.com/Current_Collection and probably could of identified them there. I have two more that were in the restoration area, aircraft 8 and aircraft 9, that don't seem to be in the listing. I was able to id the third restoration by finding a PDF of the 2009 version of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ERCO_Ercoupe&oldid=284037358. Thanks again. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 00:31, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft 9 is almost certainly the B-25J mentioned at the Alberta Aviation Museum page. Howicus (talk) 00:38, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

and the last one is a Stinson Reliant, also mentioned on the Museum's page. Howicus (talk) 00:39, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm just wondering but isn't number 8 a Cessna 172? It's ident (FPGO) is different to the Reliant (FOAY). There is a 172 listed her (#60) as an pending acquisition. I just checked the Canadian Civil Aircraft Register Database (use the four letters under mark) and both idents get hits. FOAY is listed as owned by the museum and FPGO was last owned by someone in Alberta. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 02:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]