"Jonathan Kirwan" <jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote in message
news:vsddv0dc0bpn1mcgcpfr8vetuk8djhdk4r@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 09:18:10 PST, mojaveg@mojaveg.iwvisp.com (Everett M.
Greene)
> wrote:
>
> >The cited number was for a typical case.  Yours is for a
> >particular case.
>
> I don't consider 500ms good for _typical_ cases, ever.  You would usually
find
> me on the opposite side of the table in any discussion about a specific
> instrument, if you took that point of view for it.  I've not yet met a
front
> panel on an instrument where I'd tolerate a 500ms delay from key hit to
digit
> displayed, for example.
>
> Nor would I buy one.
>
> But that is indeed just me.
>
> Jon

No, not just you.

"Ed Beroset" <beroset@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:qwqKd.55$Ix.48@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 11:09:55 PST, mojaveg@mojaveg.iwvisp.com (Everett M.
Greene)
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I believe it was in the same study that it was stated that
> >>1/4 sec. is about the minimum reaction time of people.
> >
> >
> > That may be the minimum loop time, but it's not the minimum perception
time.
> >
> > I suggest you imagine playing a keyboard and hearing the music that
results.
> > When playing music .25s slop would be considered more than disastrous (I
play
> > keyboard.)  It would be fatal.  Think about writing the software to
handle an
> > electronic piano keyboard.  I don't think you'd never sell any with a
.25s delay
> > in the responses.
>
> To this day, I still can't type on an old style IBM Selectric typewriter
> because of the annoying delay between when I hit the key and the "chunk"
> sound of the ball hitting the platen.
>
> Ed
>

ISTR using an old brother electric (thermal?) typewriter/word processor.  In
one
mode, the delay was in the number of characters typed, not clock time.  That
was
REALLY disquieting!  I think it caught up at the end of line.  The purpose,
of course,
was to allow you to erase a one or two character typo before it was
committed to
the page.

Rufus

Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 11:09:55 PST, mojaveg@mojaveg.iwvisp.com (Everett M. Greene)
> wrote:
> 
> 
>>I believe it was in the same study that it was stated that
>>1/4 sec. is about the minimum reaction time of people.
> 
> 
> That may be the minimum loop time, but it's not the minimum perception time.
> 
> I suggest you imagine playing a keyboard and hearing the music that results.
> When playing music .25s slop would be considered more than disastrous (I play
> keyboard.)  It would be fatal.  Think about writing the software to handle an
> electronic piano keyboard.  I don't think you'd never sell any with a .25s delay
> in the responses.

To this day, I still can't type on an old style IBM Selectric typewriter 
because of the annoying delay between when I hit the key and the "chunk" 
sound of the ball hitting the platen.

Ed

Grant Edwards wrote:
>
>Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com/> wrote:
>
>> First the flint hits the frizzen, making a spark.  The spark lights
>> the fine gunpowder in the pan then the fire makes it's way to the
>> hole and into the chamber, then the gun fires. Normal delay, 4-8ms.
>
>I'm curious where you got those numbers.  That seems awfully
>fast.

Oops. Typo. 40-80ms. :(

> > First the flint hits the frizzen, making a spark.  The spark lights
> > the fine gunpowder in the pan then the fire makes it's way to the
> > hole and into the chamber, then the gun fires. Normal delay, 4-8ms.
>
> I'm curious where you got those numbers.  That seems awfully
> fast.

I agree. Even a percussion muzzleloader using regular musket caps
(which I used to enjoy playing with) can take as much as half a second
to fire in normal operation. If the powder is a little damp, even
longer. It's part of the challenge of hunting with antique weapons; the
quarry can hear the snap of the priming before the main charge fires,
and it has a little time to move out of your aim.

Safety SOP for a blackpowder gun that is hanging fire is to keep it
pointed safely downrange for ONE MINUTE, then if you wish you can try
putting on another cap/refilling the pan, recocking and try again
(still keeping it pointed downrange).

On 2005-01-26, Guy Macon <_see.web.page_@_www.guymacon.com_> wrote:

> First the flint hits the frizzen, making a spark.  The spark lights
> the fine gunpowder in the pan then the fire makes it's way to the
> hole and into the chamber, then the gun fires. Normal delay, 4-8ms.

I'm curious where you got those numbers.  That seems awfully
fast.


> Occasionally there is a "hangfire", where the gun shoots a
> second or more late.  And sometimes it doesn't fire - a "flash
> in the pan. Pictures here: http://members.aol.com/illinewek/faqs/locktime.htm"

Cool. The timing measurements shown on that page show a 40ms
delay until the powder in the pan ignites.

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  I KAISER ROLL?! What
                                  at               good is a Kaiser Roll
                               visi.com            without a little COLE SLAW
                                                   on the SIDE?

On Wednesday, in article
     <10velikffpu4744@corp.supernews.com>
     _see.web.page_@_www.guymacon.com_ "Guy Macon" wrote:

>Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
>
>>I don't consider 500ms good for _typical_ cases, ever.  You would 
>>usually find me on the opposite side of the table in any discussion 
>>about a specific instrument, if you took that point of view for it.  
>>I've not yet met a front panel on an instrument where I'd tolerate 
>>a 500ms delay from key hit to digit displayed, for example.
>>
>>Nor would I buy one.
>
>Ever fire a flintlock rifle? :)
>
>
>I just thought of a system where 500ms is too short; hand grenade.

That depends on which response time you are looking at

        Time to start delay timing (handle release)

        Time to detonation.

The first is response to letting go, the second is the response time of
the delay function before calling the function

        void bang( void )

-- 
Paul Carpenter          | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/>    PC Services
<http://www.gnuh8.org.uk/>              GNU H8 & mailing list info
<http://www.badweb.org.uk/>             For those web sites you hate

Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
>
>Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com/> wrote:
>
>>Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
>>
>>>I don't consider 500ms good for _typical_ cases, ever.  You would 
>>>usually find me on the opposite side of the table in any discussion 
>>>about a specific instrument, if you took that point of view for it.  
>>>I've not yet met a front panel on an instrument where I'd tolerate 
>>>a 500ms delay from key hit to digit displayed, for example.
>>>
>>>Nor would I buy one.
>>
>>Ever fire a flintlock rifle? :)
>
>No.  Sounds interesting, though.  Are they likely to use 
>microcontrollers?  ;)
>
>I have a hunch that if they did, and if a particular one added
>a .5s delay to the triggering, and if I had a need for a 
>flintlock for some reason and had a choice from among some 
>that had much shorter delays, I'd probably not select the
>one with the micro offering a .5s delay.
>
>:)

First the flint hits the frizzen, making a spark.  The spark lights
the fine gunpowder in the pan then the fire makes it's way to the
hole and into the chamber, then the gun fires. Normal delay, 4-8ms.
Occasionally there is a "hangfire", where the gun shoots a second 
or more late.  And sometimes it doesn't fire - a "flash in the pan.
Pictures here: http://members.aol.com/illinewek/faqs/locktime.htm"

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:35:07 +0000, Guy Macon
<_see.web.page_@_www.guymacon.com_> wrote:

>Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
>
>>I don't consider 500ms good for _typical_ cases, ever.  You would 
>>usually find me on the opposite side of the table in any discussion 
>>about a specific instrument, if you took that point of view for it.  
>>I've not yet met a front panel on an instrument where I'd tolerate 
>>a 500ms delay from key hit to digit displayed, for example.
>>
>>Nor would I buy one.
>
>Ever fire a flintlock rifle? :)

No.  Sounds interesting, though.  Are they likely to use microcontrollers?  ;)

I have a hunch that if they did, and if a particular one added a .5s delay to
the triggering, and if I had a need for a flintlock for some reason and had a
choice from among some that had much shorter delays, I'd probably not select the
one with the micro offering a .5s delay.

:)

Jon

Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

>I don't consider 500ms good for _typical_ cases, ever.  You would 
>usually find me on the opposite side of the table in any discussion 
>about a specific instrument, if you took that point of view for it.  
>I've not yet met a front panel on an instrument where I'd tolerate 
>a 500ms delay from key hit to digit displayed, for example.
>
>Nor would I buy one.

Ever fire a flintlock rifle? :)





I just thought of a system where 500ms is too short; hand grenade.