Miscellaneous desk
< September 29	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	October 1 >

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.

September 30

Planning a Vacation

Im heading for a vacation in Miami Florida, Im looking for a restaurant. Delicious yet budget friendly. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.51.109 (talk) 07:02, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[1] --Viennese Waltz 08:20, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And a further 3,400 Miami restaurants at [2].--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:44, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You might get more informed advice at the Wikivoyage Tourist Office. Rojomoke (talk) 11:55, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft tires and retreading

I saw this fact in this article and was a bit puzzled: http://www.rubbernews.com/article/20130509/NEWS/130509939/manufacturers-work-on-perfecting-aircraft-tires

"It's always a sensitive subject when you discuss the causes of accidents, or the fact that retreaded aircraft tires do much better than original ones. Retreaded tires get 30 to 50 percent more landings than new ones"

How is it possible that a fixed up tire can perform better than the tire from the factory--on a regular basis? Seems counter-intuitive.

Heweidan (talk) 10:07, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps there is some selection bias here. A tire must, presumably, reach a certain age or number of landings before it needs to be retreaded. So poor quality tires fail before they reach the stage of being retreaded, and retreaded tires are, on average, better quality tires than the initial population. Gandalf61 (talk) 10:24, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that makes perfect sense.

Suppose that (hypothetically) a newly manufactured tire either does or doesn't have some kind of internal manufacturing defect that makes it blow out with a 1% chance on each landing (yikes!) - and that tires wear out and need to be retreaded after every 200 landings. New tires with the defect would generally blow out with the first 100 landings and almost certainly within the first 200. Blown out tires wind up completely shredded and can't be retreaded, so defective tires would almost always be detected and tossed into the trash before they wore out. That would mean that retreaded tires would have the "blow out" defect at a dramatically reduced probability. If blow-outs are the main cause of tire-related plane crashes (as opposed to, say, tread separation), they would be much safer than new ones.

I'm not sure that this is truly the case - but it seems plausible.

SteveBaker (talk) 14:18, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This pilot agrees with the tested-in-service theory, and adds that retreading often requires more stringent quality control than making new tires. It also allows for a different, harder type of rubber to be used for the surface of the tire, whereas new tires are cast from single material, requiring compromise between surface vs. rest of tire. 88.112.41.6 (talk) 16:32, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The original source actually mentions the more stringent requirements issue. Nil Einne (talk) 04:50, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When did the I-980 get renumbered from CA 24

I don't know if I ever trust [3] kurumi.com, I usually try to distrust Kurumi website. When did the I-980 signs went up? Is it 1985 or 1981. Our Interstate 980 said I-980 were signed in 1981. I am not sure when the Interstate 880 got signed. I know in July 1983 I-880 got accepted from FHWA, 1984 by AASHTO, but it said 1/1/1986 I-880 were completely signed. When did the I-880 signs go up in 1984 or 1986? kurumi's I-905 page said SR 905 signs went up in 1992, but our article and most websites say 1986. When a highway's numbers get redone, do crews immediately take off the old signs or they leave it dual signs for one or two more years just to let the motorist adapt to the sign change. Because the Thomas Guide 1983 edition, Harbor and Pasadena Freeway were already labelled I-110 and SR-110 (Thomas Guide copyright a year before, actually C were 1982), by the way somewhere they show a 1982 Los Angeles Copy Map, I have sharp enough eyes to get the details, actually in 1982 the Harbor Freeway and Pasadena Freeway were already labelled as I-110/SR-110, at these time only the Long Beach Freeway were still the SR 7, while the Harbor Freeway is already called the I-110.--69.233.252.198 (talk) 23:28, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you were informed last time. There can be some lag time between when the official act changing the name of the highway occurs, and when the signs change. Governments take time to act, and for various reasons, the time lag between the change of the number of the road by statute, and when people actually get around to changing the signs is impossible to predict. Signs need to get made, crews need to be hired to change them; that all takes money and time. How much money and how much time is impossible to predict. --Jayron32 02:37, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]