Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
3 result(s) for "Snook, Nigel"
Sort by:
Tasting panel: Father's Pride
I have been assured that Father's Pride has its tongue firmly in its cheek. In which case, it's quite amusing. An interesting label, but poorly illustrated and cheap looking. The copy on the side is funny-ish for the first paragraph, and then it gets more serious. I have to say, if you're going to do tongue-in-cheek, then make sure it's funny. This is a halfway house, and I think the joke will be lost on most people. I poured out a very dark, but ruddy looking beer, looking strong but tasty.
Trade Publication Article
Tasting panel: Duckstein
[Duckstein] - an unusual name. More like a cautionary cry at the Munich Beer Festival! The packaging is quirky with a bulbous bottle, Disney's magic kingdom on the label and no obvious reference to [Holsten]. Tasting more like a barley wine, pitched as a lager/ale and suffering from a long and furry aftertaste, the duck falls between two stools. The rsp is about right but the duck is a niche product rather than a mainstream one so it's got a limit to its potential. Basically, the duck is mixed up.
The 2016 CEOS Infrared Radiometer Comparison: Part II: Laboratory Comparison of Radiation Thermometers
To ensure confidence, measurements carried out by imaging radiometers mounted on satellites require robust validation using “fiducial quality” measurements of the same in situ parameter. For surface temperature measurements this is optimally carried out by radiometers measuring radiation emitted in the infrared region of the spectrum, collocated to that of a satellite overpass. For ocean surface temperatures the radiometers are usually on board ships to sample large areas but for land and ice they are typically deployed at defined geographical sites. It is of course critical that the validation measurements and associated instrumentation are internationally consistent and traceable to international standards. The Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) facilitates this process and over the last two decades has organized a series of comparisons, initially to develop and share best practice, but now to assess metrological uncertainties and degree of consistency of all the participants. The fourth CEOS comparison of validation instrumentation: blackbodies and infrared radiometers, was held at the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) during June and July 2016, sponsored by the European Space Agency (ESA). The 2016 campaign was completed over a period of three weeks and included not only laboratory-based measurements but also representative measurements carried out in field conditions, over land and water. This paper is one of a series and reports the results obtained when radiometers participating in this comparison were used to measure the radiance temperature of the NPL ammonia heat-pipe blackbody during the 2016 comparison activities (i.e., an assessment of radiometer performance compared to international standards). This comparison showed that the differences between the participating radiometer readings and the corresponding temperature of the reference blackbody were within the uncertainty of the measurements, but there were a few exceptions, particularly for a reference blackbody temperature of −30°C. Reasons that give rise to the discrepancies observed at the low blackbody temperatures were identified.