billvon 2,400 #226 August 24, 2012 >I can think of only two advantages of incandescent bulbs They are also pretty good heaters. So if you're in a situation where there's no heat in a room, and it's winter, incandescent bulbs can help you out. (They are less efficient than electrical heaters, but if you can't afford electrical heaters . . . ) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,625 #227 August 24, 2012 10 years ago I replaced the original (conventional incandescent) 250W landing light in my plane with a halogen lamp. The halogen was brighter and consumed 100W. Significant reduction in load on the alternator and battery. Lasted much longer too. (the landing light is on the cowl and is subject to a lot of vibration). Last week I replaced the halogen lamp with a 30W LED landing light; just as bright as the halogen. It's effectively immune to vibration. The light will undoubtedly outlive me.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #228 August 24, 2012 Quote 10 years ago I replaced the original (conventional incandescent) 250W landing light in my plane with a halogen lamp. The halogen was brighter and consumed 100W. Significant reduction in load on the alternator and battery. Lasted much longer too. (the landing light is on the cowl and is subject to a lot of vibration). Last week I replaced the halogen lamp with a 30W LED landing light; just as bright as the halogen. It's effectively immune to vibration. The light will undoubtedly outlive me. I use two LED based flashlights as headlights on my bike. One provides about 350 (actual, not manufacturer rated) lumens in a flood like beam, while the other provides about 150 lumens in a narrow beam. The combination works pretty well, and I can ride as fast as I want in varying low light conditions without worrying about not being able to see far enough ahead or my outs to either side. I can go about an hour before the brighter light drains its (rechargeable) cell. Often, when riding, I also carry an incan flashlight. With fresh cells, this light puts out about 400 lumens. On a white wall, there is no noticeable difference in brightness between the incan and the (brighter) LED. Outdoors, however, the incan provides much better illumination. Since it is broad spectrum light, more of the light that it emits is reflected back from the objects I wish to see. I can easily see colors and details that the LEDs just don't reveal. When I want to see if something is in front of me, the LEDs work very well. When I want to see what is in front of me, I use the incan. So why don't I use the incan all the time? The same battery volume that runs my brightest LED for about an hour only provides power to that incan for ten minutes. The incan bulbs are more fragile, and not much less expensive. The incan bulbs have a much shorter expected life than LEDs. Overall, the LEDs are a probably a better choice, but there are some things they just don't do as well.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #229 August 25, 2012 Quote Throwing someone into jail, that has drugs available, while they have an addiction to some of those drugs makes sense to you how?????? You ever been to jail? Where have I ever said they should be in jail? Lot's of ASS-U-ming going on here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #230 August 25, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteMany whuffos who have never stepped foot on a DZ, feel perfectly justified in discussing the dangers of skydiving. And many people who have never used illegal drugs feel perfectly justified in discussing the dangers of using illegal drugs. Of course, it's possible to learn about the dangers of something without actually trying it or even being around it. But I think too many people use very limited information to think they know enough to have an authoritative opinion. That's exactly what wuffos say about skydiving. I'm not really sure what your point is. Are you a crack cocaine whuffo who is trying to discuss the dangers of crack cocaine? Nope, but at least I have been around "those people" enough to know what I'm talking about. I'm gonna guess that I have far more experience with "those people" than you do. And, no offense, but you sound like you have pretty limited information. I must have missed it when you were describing your experience with people addicted to crack. How many N.A. meetings have you attended, again? I've been to a number of NA and other twelve-step meetings. I have friends who have long been clean/sober through NA, AA, and on their own. NA is not particularly informative about drugs; it's informative about how to stay off of drugs if you want to use their program. I've learned a great deal about drugs and addiction over the years, and I find NA meetings and literature to be a generally poor source of factual information. But I do think the program is helpful for many people who want to stop, and I'm grateful that some of my friends found help there. Anyhow, one of the unfortunate things about illegal drugs is that it's difficult to have an open conversation about them. So I think I've said as much as I'm going to say on a public forum. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #231 August 25, 2012 Well that IS the end game of the war on drugs. I would think they would tell people that at NA meetings. Of course never having been to one...although I do know it IS mentioned in numerous drug awareness and education classes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #232 August 25, 2012 QuoteQuoteIf you are denying that crack cocaine is the most addicting substance ever wrought on humanity, then I would have serious concerns about your perspective on other issues as well. Crack cocaine is not significantly more addictive than powder cocaine. Nicotine and heroin are both more addictive. Yeah, I don't think there is any one drug that could be classified as "the most addicting substance." Obviously some have a higher addiction potential than others, but it really depends on the individual using it. Many people experiment in moderation with "highly addictive" drugs yet never become addicted to them. Or maybe they'll get addicted to one but not others. For me, I smoked cigarettes for a long time, but I never developed a physical addiction to nicotine like so many people do. When I quit, I had no withdrawal at all, but I've seen others have a really hard time when they first quit. But I have to disagree with your statement somewhat. I do think that smoking crack cocaine is considerably more addictive than snorting powder cocaine. But I think with most drugs, smoking or shooting up greatly increases the addiction potential. Though again, it probably depends on the person. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #233 August 25, 2012 QuoteBut I have to disagree with your statement somewhat. I do think that smoking crack cocaine is considerably more addictive than snorting powder cocaine. But I think with most drugs, smoking or shooting up greatly increases the addiction potential. Though again, it probably depends on the person. That's exactly it. "The physiological and psychoactive effects of cocaine are similar regardless of whether it is in the form of cocaine hydrochloride or crack cocaine (cocaine base). However, evidence exists showing a greater abuse liability, greater propensity for dependence, and more severe consequences when cocaine is smoked (cocaine base) or injected intravenously (cocaine hydrochloride) compared with intranasal use (cocaine hydrochloride)." Source In general, cocaine is cocaine (adulterants notwithstanding). The method of use, however, is important. Smoking crack is no worse than shooting up coke.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yourmomma 0 #234 August 25, 2012 So the only way to understand crack addiction is thru your eyes? And since you have never hung with a heroin junkie you can never understand it? When I hear skydivers talk at me about B.A.S.E, should I not listen to what they say unless they have been to bridgeday? Or even better, should I listen because they have. MY BEST FRIEND WAS KILLED BY A GUN on 2/9/87. And you have the fucking audacity to just be more of a troll than me when it comes this issue. Like another poster expressed, good luck with your addictions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #235 August 25, 2012 Personal attacks say more about the person making them. It says that person cannot control their emotions. Very similar to Hitler comparisons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yourmomma 0 #236 August 25, 2012 So if crack was legal you would smoke it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #237 August 25, 2012 QuoteSo if crack was legal you would smoke it? Only an idiot would smoke crack. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #238 August 25, 2012 Quote Like another poster expressed, good luck with your addictions. Uh, no, I wished him good luck resolving his conflict being a die hard republican who knows better than you or I how we should live our lives. Any inference re: addition was done on his own. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #239 August 25, 2012 Try turning off the spell check on your Blackberry. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites