The larger size X10’s tend to dynamically self-compensate for centershot and so generally they should be aligned closer to center than conventional shafts. This is because of the relatively large barrel on the shaft. These settings work fine for the shafts weaker than 650, but for stiffer shafts, less centershot is needed than for ordinary parallel shafts. What is the best centershot setting for the X10?Ī common error made by intermediate shooters using X10 shafts is that they apply “textbook” centershot settings to the X10. Better to use the correct size arrow, or slightly reduce bow weight Generally, up to one inch can shift the shaft an equivalent of halfway toward the next stiffer shaft size- however, this reduces the effective forgiveness feature of the shaft design, which is why it’s generally not recommended. However, the exact answer to the effective amount of change varies by a number of variables, the biggest of which is the relative string amplitude at release of the archer – something no chart can account for completely. As the shaft is cut from the rear the “tail spine” of the shaft gets stiffer. This is because of the long taper on the rear of the shaft, and how the arrow reacts to “loading” on release. What’s the effect of cutting an X10/ACE from the rear/How come there’s no chart to tell us the effect/Why doesn’t Easton recommend cutting these shafts from the back?Ĭutting X10 (or, to a somewhat lower degree, the ACE) shafts from the rear of the shaft results in an effectively stiffer arrow reaction, one that is disproportionate to cutting the same amount from the front of the shaft. Also, the cost to produce the X10 is considerably more due to the materials and techniques required to hit the required tolerances. For the same reason, removing points requires a little more care and time in order to avoid overheating. Another factor is that more care is needed when gluing components, which is also due to the small diameter. The main disadvantage of the X10 is the fact that smaller diameter arrows at higher momentum potentials require better target materials to help prevent excess penetration or pass through. Most importantly, the X10 has a high ballistic coefficient – it correctly balances mass weight and momentum for better performance from recurve bows at longer distances, especially in windy conditions. The X10 is also designed with three distinct, custom spine zones- and specifically, a less stiff and- importantly- lighter tail section, which improves clearance and finger release consistency, compared to the much stiffer and heavier tail sections of parallel shafts (or even so-called “tri-spine” shafts from other makers). ![]() There are several advantages- the smaller diameter of the X10 shaft presents less surface area and a smaller cross section, which is very helpful in windy conditions at longer distances. The meteotsunami was about 2.5 feet (0.8 meters) higher than the forecast wave height and around 4 feet (1.2 meters) higher than average sea level.What advantage does the X10 have over other shafts? Are there any disadvantages? Meteotsunamis only last about an hour because once the leading edge of the storm passes onto land, the action subsides. The winds push the water, increasing the wave height near the coast before it eventually crashes onto shore. It was a meteotsunami, a type caused by storms with strong gusting winds, rather than the dramatic tsunamis triggered by earthquakes.Īccording to Paul Close, senior forecaster at the National Weather Service in the Tampa Bay area, when a line of storms tracks over the ocean, there can be 30- to 50-mph (48- 80-kph) winds near the leading edge. West Coast surfers might snicker at the cause, but the National Weather Service confirms the rare 4-foot (1.2 meter) wave was caused by a kind of tsunami, just not the kind you usually hear about. An unexpected culprit toppled beach chairs along the sand at normally calm Clearwater Beach, Florida, last Wednesday.
0 Comments
Voyetra was originally founded by Carmine Bonanno and Fred Romano in 1975 as Octave-Plateau, one of the original companies included in the MIDI standard, and had developed drivers and software for nearly every sound card manufacturer in the world during the early 1990s. The new combined company would eventually be known as Voyetra Turtle Beach. In December 1996, the company was sold by ICS to Voyetra Technologies in Yonkers, New York. CCRMA's Music Kit and DSP Tools running on Motorola 56001 DSP, initially developed for NeXTcube system, was later ported on NeXTSTEP with Turtle Beach Fiji/Pinnacle DSP cards. (now defunct), Creative Labs, and Media Vision. This product was called "MultiSound." The MultiSound product competed with more established products of the day from Advanced Gravis (now defunct), Ad Lib, Inc. This card used high quality A/D and D/A, a high quality synthesizer from eMu, and an onboard DSP chip. In 1990, Turtle Beach began developing its second PC sound card. Among the first of its kind, the product was named the "56K digital recording system" and was released in 1990. ![]() In 1988, Turtle Beach began to work on developing its first hardware product, a hard disk-based audio editing system. Ensoniq decided to resell Vision through their dealer network and Turtle Beach Softworks became a profitable company. The software, called "Vision", connected the Mirage to a PC and used the PC's screen and graphics to make the programming and editing of sounds much easier. The Mirage was the first low cost sampling device that allowed musicians to play realistic choirs, pianos, horns, and other instruments in their performances. The company's first product was a graphical editing system that supported the breakthrough Ensoniq Mirage sampling keyboard. Turtle Beach has roots dating back to 1975 in Elmsford, New York, founded as "Turtle Beach Softworks" by Roy Smith and Robert Hoke. The company began making gaming headsets in 2005. The company has roots dating back to the 1970s where it developed sound cards, MIDI synthesizers, and various audio software packages and network audio devices. The Turtle Beach Corporation (commonly referred to as Turtle Beach) is a gaming accessory manufacturer based in San Diego, California. ![]() Se definió coste de iniciar tratamiento con una pauta como los costes del TAR y de todas sus consecuencias (efectos adversos, cambios de pauta y estudio de resistencias) que se producen en las siguientes 48 semanas. Se definió eficacia como la probabilidad de tener carga viral <50 copias/ml en la semana 48 en análisis por intención de tratar. MétodosĮvaluación económica de costes y eficiencia (coste/eficacia) mediante construcción de árboles de decisión. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar los costes y la eficiencia de iniciar tratamiento con PP y PA. ConclusionĬonsidering ART official prices, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC/DTG (PR), followed by TAF/FTC/RPV (AR) and TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI (AR).Įl panel de expertos de GESIDA/Plan Nacional del Sida ha recomendado pautas preferentes (PP), pautas alternativas (PA) y otras pautas (OP) para el tratamiento antirretroviral (TAR) como terapia de inicio en pacientes infectados por VIH para 2018. The efficiency, in terms of cost-effectiveness, ranges from 7814 to 12,412 euros per responder at 48 weeks, for ABC/3TC/DTG (PR) and TAF/FTC + RAL (PR), respectively. The effectiveness varies from 0.82 for TAF/FTC + DRV/r (AR) to 0.91 for TAF/FTC + DTG (PR). In the base-case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 6788 euros for TAF/FTC/RPV (AR) to 10,649 euros for TAF/FTC + RAL (PR). A deterministic sensitivity analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable and least favourable. ![]() The setting was Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2018. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied considering only differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and HLA B*5701 testing. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen, and drug-resistance studies) over the first 48 weeks. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50 copies/mL at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. MethodsĮconomic assessment of costs and efficiency (cost-effectiveness) based on decision tree analyses. The objective of this study was to evaluate the costs and the efficiency of initiating treatment with PR and AR. The GESIDA/National AIDS Plan expert panel recommended preferred regimens (PR), alternative regimens (AR) and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for 2018. |