charles Wrote in message:
In article , Jim K
wrote:
charles Wrote in message:
In article , Max
Demian wrote:
On 21/03/2018 23:10, Jim K wrote:
Max Demian Wrote in message:
On 21/03/2018 20:22, Jim K wrote:
Johnny B Good Wrote in
message:

It was not I who was obsessed with bridges needing to be
"flat", it was you. I think you are conflating Brian's mention
about 'flatness' and curvature of the Earth corrections with my
not being able to find a curvature of the earth divergence figure
for the Severn bridge to compare against the figure that Tim+ had
found for the Humber bridge. I made no mention of 'flatness'
until you introduced it into this sub-thread.

-- Johnny B Good


Oh dear. Put very simply, if one wasn't trying to build
something flat, why would one be bothered with calculations to
the mm to allow for curvature of the earth ? !

To ensure that it's curved to the right degree?

Such as a.........? (not a bridge shurely, if anything they are more
likely to be hump backed...)

A long, perfectly flat bridge deck would effectively dip in the middle
from a gravity POV. You would probably want it to follow the
curvature of the Earth.

Indeed, if you drive over one of these long bridges you are going "up
hill" to the centre and then down again on the other side.

-- from KT24 in Surrey, England


You can sometimes see ships going underneath too...

I try not to look sideways

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England


Blinkers?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/