So the Zuck passed the turing test. It seems that congress did not pass that same test.
I think it's more of a draw than an actual win.
For either side.
Of course the US FB users lost, but then that was predictable.
16330 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
Indeed.
Senator Feinstein banging on about FB was a "Are you f**king kidding me?" moment.
And let's be clear, she favours slurping up everyone's data in the US (and frankly anyone they connect to world wide).
No choice. No exceptions.
Would that make her a "Demoncrat In Name Only" or "DINO"?
Actually not even that.
They are not "Astronauts," that's the crew.
They are "Spaceflight participants"
While you may despise them the fact remains quite a lot of people put serious money down for tickets for this.
I'd have said Skylon could be described as the next logical step up. If $500k gets you sub-orbital what's full orbital worth?
Which I'm pretty sure the BO (Beardie One) would have been pretty enthusiastic about.
Sadly, reading between the lines, any contacts between REL and VG have not gone well.
That's called a "Pulse jet."
It's not anywhere close to SABRE's cycle.
One of the key design drivers for SABRE was that it must generate thrust from 0 Km/h.
No catapults (which the V1 used). No sleds. No high pressure gas injection.
BTW A pulse jets thermal efficiency is pretty poor. IOW it's fuel consumption is quite high.
REL estimate that an all rocket Skylon would carry 100 tonnes more LOX (it's already carrying about 160 tonnes)
Basically that shifts the whole balance.
Too much weight, too little Isp --> mandatory feather weight structures --> impossible to make orbit.
Again it's not just "Not carrying the O2" it's Isp==3000secs. not 380sec (the SSME at takeoff)
It's an old cliche that "The rocket equation is steep." That high Isp lasts long enough to make all the difference
Wow, you're powers of observation are astounding.
Actually it's more like 21% but what you've missed is that during that period it's average Isp is 6.6x that of the best available viable rocket propellant (not the classic but unworkable LH2/LF2/Lithium)
In addition to the oxidizer coming from the air its also pushing the other 80% inert reaction mass out the back IE the N2. And in this game more mass --> more momentum.
That Isp buys you the luxury of not needing paper thin tank walls (which is what VTOL SSTO usually comes down to) and the wings handle most of the gravity losses since the vehicle is always more or less horizontal from takeoff.
So you get a design that a) Needs tough but within the SoA structural fractions (not unobtanium) b) Robust to survive multiple uses from full reentry with full payload (which killed the idea of a reusable F9 US) and c) Does so with a payload fraction like that of a normal TSTO ELV, historically impossible for VTOL SSTO's, and more so for rocket only HTOL vehicles.
Not as long you might think.
AFAIK the existing money gets them through the ground test phase.
This money (and note the 2 VC companies who did not say how much they have put in) may be enough to get them the "Flight Test Vehicle" built. It's initial goal is to fly the test engine through the air and past the air breathing to rocket transition. The last major difference between SABRE and a conventional jet or rocket engine. It only needs to run long enough to reach steady state. Say 10secs after transition, before engine shut down and a glide back to ground.
BTW AIUI this would make the FTV the first reusable hypersonic test vehicle since the X-15.
Now if they designed suitable "hooks" into the structure there could be several customers who would like to fly experiments on such a vehicle. Obviously REL's needs come first and it may not be possible but it's an intriguing idea. If there was an extra X Kg available (or could be made available if RELs instrumentation was removed perhaps).....
Why don't you try reading my replies instead?
I got the point about the difference between actual gyroscopes and reaction wheels/Control Moment Gyros (which were used on Skylab and are being used on the ISS).
The challenge for your idea is how to build a passive magnetic bearing, so all the power is in spinning up (or down) the rotor? With a conventional bearing the relationship between the rotor and case is guaranteed. With any imbalenced force the rotor starts to drift off axis.
IIRC "Halbach" arrays of magnets are the most efficient for generating force but you still have to null out any imperfections. That's a continuous current drain.
It looks like reaction wheel/CMG bearing failure will (along with battery failure) be the most probably life ending component for space probes for the foreseeable future.
With you now.
That's a whole different thing.
I prefer the idea of CMG's. Once spun up they need relatively little power to keep spinning and low power to alter the axis of rotation.
One thing I've not seen explored is the idea of a dense fluid in a circular pipe, perhaps with some inert gas, so you form lumps of it. I'm thinking of a low melting point alloy to make it conductive with say Tungsten beads to make up the weight.
As I noted there have been no new "spinning metal" gyroscopes installed in transatlantic passenger planes since the mid 80's, say 35 years?
Ariane 4 was flying with laser gyroscopes since it was the failure to cope with the upgraded performance of the A5 rocket that caused the maiden launch of A5 to fail.
Hence my expectation that space navigation grade laser gyroscopes are a thing by now and my surprise they are still a problem.
IIRC that's what hurt most of the copies of them on Hubble.
But these days aren't most of them laser based (certainly for large passenger jets since the mid 80's IIRC) ?
The best seem to be the solid crystal lump types, however they seem to need a "dither" spring that (I presume) can age).
So how do they "age"?
Mind you. Full OS upgrade from 140 million miles away and works right first time. Impressive.
IOW it's not OFCOM f**king up as usual its the other broadband suppliers turning their noses up at this.
And they're right. It still leave OpenReach in the driving seat.
The real f**kup was OFCOM's failure to construct a legal argument that would stand up in court.
Given how much control they were asking BT to give up a court case was inevitable.
Let's see if OFCOM can do better next time (and how far down the road will that be).
Ha.
During an audit on space Shuttle operations Boeing discovered it was supported by 1000 (yes literally 1000) separate databases, some still on paper.
Of course they didn't actually automate or consolidate any of this stuff, but the point is there have been worse systems (which ,like the UK Immigration system) have also developed over long periods of time on the principle "We need a database to record to this stuff, but all the existing ones are too slow/too difficult to extend, so we'll build a new one instead."
Citizen.
You are clearly in possession of state secrets relating to State computer systems you are not authorized to work on.
Sit still and await for authorized personnel to collect you for interrogation.
<signed>
Big Brother.
Or
Program it so someone is not being treated and instead of them getting better they get worse.
Honestly those MID mfg.
Cheap motherf**ing ba***ds.
Literally f**k all notion that this thing could run for decades on site.
Would a stripped down Linux be so much more expensive?
Calm yourself citizen.
As a recognized "Centre for Evil" in the UK the Home Office is working tirelessly to ensure that will not be the case.
App defaults will be chosen to be as inconvenient as possible.
Error correction after entry will be almost impossible to carry out.
Multiple fields will be inexplicably interlocked with out proven "Kafkaesque maze" technology.
And of course the app will follow SOP for all phone apps and demand full access to your address book and email, GPS and IP address.
<signed>
The Home Office.
We take evil seriously.
No.
They are thinking about getting a clean load for the next time the data fetishists involved try to foist a national ID card on British subjects.
This behaviour is creepy and smells.
It's another case of the Home Office f**king up and getting someone else (in this case the schools) to do their job for them.
I'm quite well aware of the ISS's location. I'm also aware that zero g poses special problems.
And again, outside of an SF story what you're talking about has not been done, so no it's not "traditional" in space applications. It's (currently) just a fantasy.
In real life 'naughts basically eat pre prepared redimeals. This is unsustainable for long term settlement or cost effective exploration.
I agree we should be growing food in space and using it as a way to process human waste, but currently we don't. I expect much more closure for any settlement on Mars given it will be that much more expensive to supply it (and the 26 month delay between resupply).
In an SF novel, maybe
IRL the only biological thing being recycled in the ISS is the 'naughts urine and sweat.
Everything else is either dried and sent back to Earth for analysis or dumped in a capsule and burned in reetnry.
There have been experiments to grow food on the ISS. None have AFAIK used human waste.
You are literally spouting bu***hit.
Most of these systems like their raw material pristine and carefully prepared. NASA has done some work on this with converting old plastic packaging into raw material and making hand tools and containers but long term (on Mars say) you've got to make it from local raw materials.
Which is where this stuff comes in.
Fermentation is awesome so I'd like to raise a glass of another of the wonders of fermentation technology. Cheers.
True.
This is SOP for US corporations and has been since at least the time of Philo Farnsworth and even the patents of AG Bell (who had a very helpful lawyer with good friends in the USPO of the time).
Later there was the case of Ford and the intermittent wiper blade drive.
These are only the famous ones. You can bet there are plenty more out there. NCR comes to mind.
By rocket standards 94% is a phenomenal record.
Versus (for example) the 51 of 53 F9's at the pad (yes I do count Amos 6 since the customer lost the payload).
That's 96%. but on a much smaller total.
Now if that holds at 97 launches that also would be impressive.
They had free run of the companies servers for about 6 months.
Why wouldn't they think that after a few months without being hit the company would return to the same lazy, slipshod ways that let them gain access in the first place?
This is the internet.
If the reward is big enough or the cost (of compromising someone) small enough (because they essentially have no security) then any company is likely to get a visit.
It's not if, it's when.