Winter Parka Reviews: Fjallraven Nuuk v/s Marmot Chelsea 2.0 v/s North Face Arctic Parka v/s Patagonia Frozen Range v/s Patagonia Tres 3-in-1 v/s REI Stormhenge Jacket

Winter Parka Reviews: Fjallraven Nuuk v/s Marmot Chelsea 2.0 v/s North Face Arctic Parka v/s Patagonia Frozen Range v/s Patagonia Tres 3-in-1 v/s REI Stormhenge Jacket

Firstly, I found these coats to be the most popularly recommended when you search for the warmest winter parkas (except for REI Stormhenge, for a strange reason). They are also under 300 dollars when they’re on sale  (except for the Pataguccis). I was also looking for coats that could last me through whatever the winter put me through, hence my selection of waterproof parkas. 

I am discussing them on four criteria: Warmth, Comfort, Style, and Weather Resistance. At the testing condition of 6C/43F (windchill 4C/39F), I was leisurely walking and reading comics on my phone. I had only a half-sleeve cotton T-shirt on. I generally run very cold and keep my A/C temperature set at 22C/72F at home while wearing a light sweatshirt.

Warmth:

Fjallraven Nuuk was the warmest of all of these. It came as a surprise since it has all synthetic insulation. I was comfortable wearing just a half-sleeve cotton T-shirt underneath. The parka reached mid-thigh on my 5’4” frame. I would survive much lower temperatures if I had mid-layers on. 

Fjallraven Nuuk

Marmot Chelsea 2.0, despite its 700 down fill, wasn’t warm enough by itself like Fjallraven Nuuk was. I could feel the chill on my back in the testing conditions. I would need a mid-layer with this parka.

Marmot Chelsea 2.0

North Face Arctic Parka was similar. I could feel the chill through the coat. I am unsure if I would do well wearing this parka if I were outside in sub-freezing temperatures in a snowstorm.  When I was in Chicago for a few days in February, I saw many women wearing the Arctic Parka, so take my word with a pinch of salt.

North Face Arctic Parka

Patagonia Frozen Range 3-in-1 is toasty, and unlike Fjallraven Nuuk, it is also quite light due to its 700 down fill. I did very well wearing just the t-shirt underneath it under the testing conditions.

Patagonia Frozen Range 

Patagonia Tres 3-in-1 is also 700 down fill but not as warm as Frozen Range. I felt similarly chilly in the parka as I did with the North Face Arctic Parka and Marmot Chelsea 2.0. 

Patagonia Tres 3-in-1

My REI Stormhenge jacket (not the parka) has been in my possession for two seasons now, and I couldn’t love it more. It has an 800 down fill with synthetic insulation in the sides where sweat is most easily produced. While I was not as warm in it as in Fjallraven Nuuk, it performed similarly to Patagonia Frozen Range. You would be right in asking, why did I not buy the parka 

version itself? At the time, I needed a jacket that I could wear while hiking and the parka length would not have been ideal in such a situation. 

REI Stormhenge Parka

Comfort:

I typically wear a Small or Medium size in jackets if it is a slim fit. I could have easily gone down to an extra-small. This is with a heavy middle layer on. I loved how much freedom of movement I had in the Fjallraven Nuuk.

I preferred to wear a medium size in the Marmot Chelsea 2.0 to allow for mid-layers. It felt bulky around my chest and shoulders, and the collar felt stiff around my jaw. I have a longer neck, so I am unsure how comfortable I would be with that collar for extended periods.

I wore a small size in the North Face Arctic Parka. I had enough space for a thick fleece as a mid-layer. The parka went down to my knees, which says good things about how much of my body would stay covered.

I wore a size small in the Patagonia Frozen Range is a strange one. Unlike other 3-in-1 coats, the outer waterproof shell doesn’t zip to the inner down jacket. And yes, the inner layer is a down jacket, not a parka. It covered my hips like my REI Stormhenge, and that was about it. With the outer shell, it came close to mid-thigh. The cuffs cannot be tightened, which would let the cold air in.

The Patagonia Tres 3-in-1 is slim-fit in shape. I needed to wear a medium. Due to the fit, I am unsure if I could wear a thick sweater underneath it. 

I wear a small size in my REI Stormhenge with enough space for a mid-layer. This is the most comfortable to wear amongst all the mentioned coats, all thanks to its low weight and roomy shape.

Style

Fjallraven Nuuk is cute and has a casual feel. I like to look sleek on most occasions, and considering how I would wear this to work also, I wanted something that looked well-cut and professional. Ultimately, I decided that I could look cute, and that would also be a look. This is especially because I would be toasty warm in this.

Marmot Chelsea 2.0 looks bulky around the bust and shoulders. It just looks odd on my body shape. If you have a pear shape or an hourglass figure, you should try it to see if it looks better on you.

The North Face Arctic Parka has a stream-lined shape and drapes well like a traditional coat over the body. You wouldn’t go wrong with this parka.

Many people have described Patagonia’s Frozen Range as a cloud in their review, and I agree. However, it is a flattering cloud.

The Patagonia Tres 3-in-1 wins hands-down in the style department. I looked so sharp in it that I was heartbroken that it wasn’t warm enough for me.

The Red Stormhenge has a straight silhouette. My only gripe on certain days is that it is baggy around the chest and doesn’t contour the torso. This is my personal opinion. Many people would absolutely love its shape and I would agree with them on most days.

Weather Resistance

All of the parkas that I have mentioned, perform very well in windy and rainy conditions. Patagonia’s Tres 3-in-1 performs the best among them in heavier rain. The others wouldn’t perform very well if it was pouring.

Final Opinion

I love the Fjallraven Nuuk and REI Stormhenge the best among these coats based on how much warmth and features I get for the price. If I was able to compromise on the warmth, I would probably go for the Patagonia Tres 3-in-1 or the North Face Arctic Parka.

Designing the right Inductor for your circuit

For my final year engineering project, I needed to make an inductor. Now that the context is provided, let's jump straight into some tips for designing.

There are a lot of sites that will tell you about how to choose an inductor core. While they are helpful, if you already have an idea about things, but if you're completely new to hardware designing they can be incredibly confusing, and frankly a waste of time.

1. First of all, decide the value of inductance that you need. Take it as your nominal value. Next, decide the range of inductance that you will be okay with. Designing your own inductor, especially if you're new to the game like I am, getting the perfect value is too perfect a coincidence to occur.
The requirement of nominal value and the range of inductance will come in handy later on.

2. You can choose a variety of shapes for your inductor core like toroidal, EI, EE etc. What I learnt that making a toroid is risky business. This is because, in the toroidal shape, the wire turns will be closely packed along the inner diameter of the toroid, and will have spaces between the turns along the outside. This space can introduce stray capacitance. But don't let this bog you down. If you're ready to experiment, don't hesitate to make your toroidal inductor and share your observations on it.

3. Since you're designing the circuit, you already know what voltage value you're using. This is known as the DC Bias. You will also know the value the current that is going to flow in the circuit and through the inductor. You can use this information (as stated in multiple sites) and make a preliminary choice of core shape.

4. Once you have done this, choose the kind of core that you want. Make a list of cores designs you're okay with. Eg. EE65-13 (That's what I have used) etc. Once you have done this, visit the website you will be buying the core from, or the shop you're going to purchase it from. Look at the available choices and take one that is one or two sizes smaller. This is because you can make multiple layers of turns but making an incomplete layer of turns wouldn't be the ideal case. 

Goodbye

Blessed are they who had the chance to say Goodbye,
For it is a pain worse than death itself
To think they will return as always,
But only to be left with unfulfilled resolutions.

Crazy eyes

Crazy eyes, I see crazy eyes.
eyes livid enough to burn someone down.

She prowls around her prey.
Noticing each and every chick in its armour.
One by one she prepares her attacks,
Waiting only for the slightest provocation.

Crazy eyes, I see crazy eyes.
Eyes livid enough to burn anyone down.

The prey, the fool, gets too close.
Says to much, unthinking and inconsiderate.
She's seen all and there's no stopping her.
It's her against her prey now.

Crazy eyes, I see crazy eyes.
Eyes livid enough to burn everyone down.

She takes out her guns and begins her furore.
There is no running away for the fool.
All that she has heard, everything she's borne,
Will now burst out and decimate everything.

Crazy eyes, I saw crazy eyes.
Eyes livid enough to burn everything down.

Talent and Person- A question for morality

Have you seen The Carmichael Show? You should. For a comedy series in today's age, it is surprisingly insightful and entertaining.

I am particularly impressed by the second episode of Season 2 in the series. The protagonist of the show, Jerrod gets tickets to a live show by Bill Cosby for his family on his parents' anniversary following which there's intense and comedic discussion over whether they should attend the show or not, given the recent news of Cosby's scandals.

Jerrod's girlfriend is the first to put up her argument. She tells him categorically that there's no way she attending one of his shows. She even goes on to joke about how ironic it is that the only way she would go is if she were taken there unconscious.

Jerrod's father puts up a diplomatic front where he believes that until proven guilty in a court, he's not going to openly judge Cosby. While talking to Maxine, Jerrod's girl-friend, he even asks whether we should pass judgments based on what people are saying on the internet.

During all this the matriarch of the house and Jerrod's mother, keeps switching in her opinions. She's got fond memories of her and her husband laughing and enjoying Bill Cosby's stand up acts and shows. So she's torn between going or not and keeps looking at Maxine for validation.
Jerrod's brother doesn't have much to say and keeps talking of random stuff, all indirectly related to the topic at hand but never really anywhere close to the real point.

With Nekeisha's arrival (Jerrod's brother's ex wife), the women seem to have firmly decided that they will not go and hence show any kind of support to the tainted comedian.

Jerrod frustrated, puts up a beautiful point that I don't even want to rephrase. Read it for yourself. Facing Maxine he says, "You're being hypocritical, Maxine. Aren't you the same person who saw Blue Jasmine during the height of the Woody Allen scandal? Just putting money directly into his pockets? Fine, if you don't go see Bill Cosby, then I will never go see a Woody Allen film again. I'm not judging you for seeing his movies. You should see them. He's a great artist. I'm just saying you need to separate people's personal life from their work. I mean, anybody's capable of doing something violent or disgusting, but the list of people with genuine talent is limited. So, talent trumps morals."

Even if I don't support the last statement, I have to say, Jerrod makes a very valid point.
We as human beings are very selective in the moral principles that we follow. Just taking the entertainment industry into account, we listen to Michael Jackson despite the alleged reports of him being a pedophile. 
While we slam Chris Brown for what he did to Rihanna, we are still grooving to his music.
We coo at Woody Allen's movies, openly acknowledging them as masterpieces despite his relationship and marriage to his former step-daughter, that began while he was still in relationship with the adoptive mother Mia Farrow. I myself carried a backpack with his face's impression on it for a year at college. And these three examples are just from the top of my head. There are so many more celebrities and artists and famous personalities whom we have supported despite their grave moral transgressions.

So why such double standards when it comes to judging them? We don't directly interact with the person because of his/her misdeeds. But sitting at home or elsewhere, protected by our anonymity, we continue to indulge in the fruits of these people's talents. Isn't that also a form of support, even if indirect. Every time we go watch their movie or buy their CD or even illegally download their work, aren't we appreciating them?

One might say that we're enjoying their talent and not them. But that is the question. Is a person the same as his/her talent? We conveniently detach the two when it suits us and when it comes to passing judgments from the comfort of our couches, we no longer remember the distinction. 

I am not writing this to pass off my opinion. Not because I don't have one but because I know I will, however unknowingly, commit the act of hypocrisy. I cannot swear on my morality because I am humble enough to accept my imperfect humanity. 

The important question is- What is your opinion? 

Debating and other dangerous stuff on the Internet

When you're confronted with an incident or issue, it is natural to have an opinion. It is also natural not to have any strong opinion because you don't know the whole case. "Fortunately" the age of social networking sites has raised armchair activism to a whole new level. A single fb status, comment or tweet can create a domino effect, whose result isn't always what we intended.

The only "right" action to take would probably be to understand the situation before passing a judgement. Realise that just as you have the incredible power to change things, also have the humility to understand that you are not a judge and executioner and that you have the duty to wield your power with responsibility. Practice due diligence. What you see on your screen or on paper was written by a human, therefore undoubtedly plagued with bias, however little. So pause and reflect. And then act. Or don't. No one needs to go blaring horns and being militant in their views just to be visible.

I won't share famous quotes on taking sides. Because for each quote I put up, there will be one that disagrees with it. I also understand that just because a famous person put up an argument, doesn't make it the truth. And to expect to be right, armed with only these sayings is not just foolish but also dangerous.

Shout! Shout! Shout!

Shout! Shout! Shout!

I cry in surprise. I bleed in hurt.

I fear your hands and words that erupt.

Shout! Shout! Shout!

I wail in confusion. I break at your insult.

I diminish into the nothing that you had had me built.

Shout! Shout! Shout!

I feel no more. I see you no more. 

I hear only the silence now that I suffer you no more.