Formerly associated with MIT

I get that, but I think it’s sad. As a past hiring manager, I ran into people that could run rings around MIT grads and performed flawlessly (until they got bored.) It’s the hiring process that counts, not the paper. Paper says something, but it doesn’t say everything.

Did you go to MIT?

I used to live about a mile from them, looked into applying there myself, and the reviews on Glassdoor are not complementary. Admittedly, usually it’s people with a grudge who post those reviews, but from what people are saying, it’s MIT or GTFO.

::grabs manilla envelope::

Imagine the poor guy who had to hold onto the rope as he was hanging out the window and had to count each knot go through his hand?

Typically the smaller the ducted fan the less efficient it is, which explains why high-bypass turbofans continue to be made in ever larger sizes.

I moved cargo professionally on C-17's for the Air Force. I can promise you that the CG implications of requiring a craft to hover vertically and then re-orient the fuselage horizontally would be complex. I’m not saying a tail sitter is a bad idea but it would complicate loading, planning, and make things much more…

OK, so make it a tail-sitter with two large diameter ducted fans then, if you insist on throwing away efficiency via an additional mechanical-electric-mechanical transmission step and losing the advantage of 100% centerline thrust. And if your cargo isn’t secured well enough or can’t tolerate being tipped 90 degrees,…

Because of how easily it integrates with charts and measurements. A nautical mile is one minute of arc along a meridian, so it integrates with map projections directly.

On a side note, anyone know why we still use “knots” for air speed instead of mph or kph?