They tend to be, yes, because the longer the flight, the higher the aircraft flies (fuel considerations), and you are more likely to run into turbulence at 13,000 feet than at 29,000 feet, all things considered. Turbulence is possible, of course, at any altitude, though.
I have curly hair and I think its a little less curly shorter. Not sure but, it might be
Shorter because you have less oxygen circulating your body
I'd say Boeing 767 because then you'd have to do shorter flights you'd be less tired.
Shorter focal length lens would bend the rays more. Longer focallength would bend the rays comparatively less.
Because the shorter wire gives less resistance than the longer one and more electricity per inch is distributed to the shorter wire.
no the bob on the shorter one has less distance per period to travel
no the bob on the shorter one has less distance per period to travel
Shorter because its orbit is smaller and its takes less time to complete its round around sun
Other things (cross-section, material) being equal, a longer piece of conductor has more resistance (i.e., less conductance) than a shorter piece.
Everything else being equal, a shorter bridge is stronger: it will weigh less, and therefore will not have to support so much of its own weight.
Advantage: objects in a turbulent flow experience less drag. Disadvantage: turbulent flows are unstable meaning velocity and pressures change rapidly. The objects in the flow have less stability. The flow also is more difficult to model then a laminar flow.
38.4 centimeters is longer than 38.19 centimeters.