OzOne wrote
We seem to get involved in just about anything these days :-)

And money chases money.

and I agree with you on the rails except that they are designed to do
just one job, and do it very well.


It's an example of "sport engineering" taken to the Nth degree... the
engineering is the sum & total of the sport.

Maxprop wrote:
Indeed. There are many such highly-specialized contrivances in sports and
competitions these days. Take for example the trials bikes--not much good
for motocross or trail riding, but they do what they do better than any
other motorcycle.

Yep. And they're just as silly IMHO. Why limit the power application to
conventional drivetrain & wheels? Why not use jets?


... Same with sub-specialized ski boats, those radical
multihulls built only to break the world sailing speed record, Burt Rutan's
various aircraft designed with a sole purpose in mind, F1 cars, and so on,
ad infinitum. It's hard to be critical of such creations as a lot of
technological fallout makes its way to the things we buy and use daily.


No it's not, it's real easy. The second group of things you mentioned
are not quite as silly because they are not quite as artificial. For
example, Burt Rutan's planes perform magnificently and respectably
against all other planes, not just within the confines of a set of
highly complex human-imposed rules. F1 cars would be a heck of a lot of
fun to drive to work... would need better brakes, probably... but their
performance envelope is not one-dimensional even if they do have a lot
of artificially-imposed restraints.

I agree that technological cross-over is a main reason why boats,
planes, cars, etc etc, are much better in most respects than they were
25 or even 10 years ago. But rails are still silly.

Regards
Doug King