Harry Potter Fans Can Spend This Halloween at Hogwarts

Warner Bros. Studio Tour London—The Making of Harry Potter
Warner Bros. Studio Tour London—The Making of Harry Potter

Harry Potter and Halloween both have some pretty hardcore fans. So when these worlds converge, it’s sure to be a spooky, spellbinding occasion.

Warner Bros. Studio Tour London—The Making of Harry Potter is hosting a series of Halloween-themed “Hogwarts After Dark” events this October, according to Travel + Leisure. Guests will be treated to a two-course meal with drinks—plus dessert and butterbeer—inside the actual Great Hall that appeared in the movies. The room will be decorated with over 100 enchanted floating pumpkins, cauldrons, and other original film props.

After that, guests will be led to the Forbidden Forest for dessert, where they’ll rub shoulders (figuratively speaking) with Buckbeak the Hippogriff and Aragog the Acromantula. Don’t be surprised if you see some Death Eaters roaming around, too—they'll be dressed in original costumes and masks from the movie.

Actors in death eater costumes
Warner Bros. Studio Tour London—The Making of Harry Potter

After dinner, guests will be led through the studio to see the Gryffindor common room, the Weasley family’s kitchen, and the dimly lit Diagon Alley. They’ll also have the chance to learn some wizarding combat tactics from Paul Harris, who boasts the impressive title of Wand Choreographer.

The Hogwarts After Dark events will be held October 26-28, from 7:30 p.m. to midnight, and are only open to individuals age 18 years or older. Tickets cost about $300 per person and go on sale August 28; they must be pre-booked on the studio's website.

Separate costume events will also be held on October 6 and October 7. And if you can’t make it to any of those events, you’ll still have the chance to see Death Eaters and floating pumpkins during one of the studio’s Dark Arts tours, which will be held from September 28 to November 10.

[h/t Travel + Leisure]

What Would Happen If a Plane Flew Too High?

iStock
iStock

Tom Farrier:

People have done this, and they have died doing it. For example, in October 2004, the crew of Pinnacle Airlines 3701 [PDF]  was taking their aircraft from one airport to another without passengers—a so-called "repositioning" flight.

They were supposed to fly at 33,000 feet, but instead requested and climbed to 41,000 feet, which was the maximum altitude at which the aircraft was supposed to be able to be flown. Both engines failed, the crew couldn't get them restarted, and the aircraft crashed and was destroyed.

The National Transportation Safety Board determined that the probable causes of this accident were: (1) the pilots’ unprofessional behavior, deviation from standard operating procedures, and poor airmanship, which resulted in an in-flight emergency from which they were unable to recover, in part because of the pilots’ inadequate training; (2) the pilots’ failure to prepare for an emergency landing in a timely manner, including communicating with air traffic controllers immediately after the emergency about the loss of both engines and the availability of landing sites; and (3) the pilots’ improper management of the double engine failure checklist, which allowed the engine cores to stop rotating and resulted in the core lock engine condition.

Contributing to this accident were: (1) the core lock engine condition, which prevented at least one engine from being restarted, and (2) the airplane flight manuals that did not communicate to pilots the importance of maintaining a minimum airspeed to keep the engine cores rotating.

Accidents also happen when the "density altitude"—a combination of the temperature and atmospheric pressure at a given location—is too high. At high altitude on a hot day, some types of aircraft simply can't climb. They might get off the ground after attempting a takeoff, but then they can't gain altitude and they crash because they run out of room in front of them or because they try to turn back to the airport and stall the aircraft in doing so. An example of this scenario is described in WPR12LA283.

There's a helicopter version of this problem as well. Helicopter crews calculate the "power available" at a given pressure altitude and temperature, and then compare that to the "power required" under those same conditions. The latter are different for hovering "in ground effect" (IGE, with the benefit of a level surface against which their rotor system can push) and "out of ground effect" (OGE, where the rotor system supports the full weight of the aircraft).

It's kind of unnerving to take off from, say, a helipad on top of a building and go from hovering in ground effect and moving forward to suddenly find yourself in an OGE situation, not having enough power to keep hovering as you slide out over the edge of the roof. This is why helicopter pilots always will establish a positive rate of climb from such environments as quickly as possible—when you get moving forward at around 15 to 20 knots, the movement of air through the rotor system provides some extra ("translational") lift.

It also feels ugly to drop below that translational lift airspeed too high above the surface and abruptly be in a power deficit situation—maybe you have IGE power, but you don't have OGE power. In such cases, you may not have enough power to cushion your landing as you don't so much fly as plummet. (Any Monty Python fans?)

Finally, for some insight into the pure aerodynamics at play when airplanes fly too high, I'd recommend reading the responses to "What happens to aircraft that depart controlled flight at the coffin corner?"

This post originally appeared on Quora. Click here to view.

Baskin-Robbins Russia Debuts Self-Driving Ice Cream Truck

iStock
iStock

While technologists tend to tout the potential benefits of self-driving cars for futuristic commuters, the best use of autonomous driving technology may not involve passengers at all. (Apologies to everyone who wants to nap while they drive.) What we really need are self-driving ice cream trucks.

In Russia, that's already a reality. A driverless ice cream truck from Baskin-Robbins Russia and a company called Avrora Robotics just debuted in Moscow, according to The Calvert Journal.

The VendBot, similar to a smart ice cream vending machine on wheels, debuted at Moscow's Hydroaviasalon conference, an event about seaplane technology and science. The small vehicle is currently designed to move around parks, event spaces, and shopping centers, and can maneuver independently, detecting obstacles and stopping for customers along the way. For its debut, it was stocked with six different Baskin-Robbins flavors.


View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Мороженое Баскин Роббинс (@baskinrobbinsrussia) on

Based on videos of the VendBot Baskin-Robbins Russia posted to the company's Instagram account, the miniature truck doesn't come equipped with the jingles U.S. ice cream trucks play incessantly. Instead, it beeps to alert potential customers of its presence instead. Once it stops, customers can order their dessert from a keypad on the side of the vehicle similar to ordering from a vending machine.


View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Мороженое Баскин Роббинс (@baskinrobbinsrussia) on

Avrora Robotics, based outside of Moscow in Ryazan, Russia, specializes in developing autonomous vehicles for freight transport, industrial farming, and military use. And now, ice cream delivery.

Unfortunately, there's no mention of Baskin-Robbins bringing its driverless ice cream truck to other countries just yet, so we will have to content ourselves with chasing after human-driven ice cream trucks for a while still.

[h/t The Calvert Journal]

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER