Except that the study, and the resulting mathematical expression, are touted
as being based solely on the "metabolic cost" to a _human_ walking up a
Perhaps in a very limited way, but pardon me if I'm a bit skeptical of the
usefulness of correlating a mathematical expression based on biologic human
"metabolic cost" to "autonomous navigation".
IOW, I'm still convinced that it's more on the order of a boondoogle, than a
boon, to mankind. ;)
LOL As a runner and a backpacker, I find it relatively difficult to
believe that you can convert data based on VO2 capacity for humans to
tanks that would have an infinite number of gearing and HP
However, this discussion comes down to whether the conclusion of the
study is "apparent and obvious to most, but without precision" or if
so many intelligent people do not see it as "apparent and obvious"
that the expenditure of funds is justified. I think the former, but
certainly do not have the statistical data to make any claim other
than an opinion.
Additionally, most elevating trails that I'm familiar with use the
basic principle of switchback, but the terrain dictactes how often and
when the switchbacks occur. This I would assume to make the
trailblazing practical. Leads me to wonder what the study brings to
my $.02 worth.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.