Re: This may be a really obvious question.
>"through-planet neutrino communication"
>Is that really a thing?
Transmitter = yes
Receiver = no
So 50% of target achieved
26124 publicly visible posts • joined 31 Dec 2009
Aircraft are designed to be moved by tugs very slowly and carefully
If you wanted to tow a fully loaded and fuelled 747 at 30mph you would need a much stronger towing point - especially if you wanted the ability to stop quickly. F=ma is a bugger.
You would probably also need an interface to allow the tug to control the brakes on the main gear
So the airline would have to pay for heavier nose gear and carry the weight on every flight for the benefit of the airport. So unless a major continent made this mandatory at all airports you have a catch-22.
The APT project's problems were beyond anything to do with the turbine.
I wonder how practical a mass-produced turbine hybrid car engine would be?
A small 50-100Hp turbine with an integrated brushless type generator, so you don't have to make a 20,000rpm gearbox. It could run at a constant speed/load just charging the battery
Safety containment shouldn't be any harder than a turbo. Modern control is trivial (lab turbo molecular pumps run at 100K rpm safely) . They can burn pretty much any fuel and should be hot enough to have very little particle exhaust.
Virgin tested this at Heathrow as a green program.
It wasn't capable of towing at anything like taxi speed (max 30knts for the 737, 25knts for a 747).
IIRC it was abandoned because it was limited to little more than walking pace, a combination of a safety requirement (eg. stopping distance) and nose gear strength.
It would make a lot of sense from noise, cost, pollution, safety etc - but I suspect it's one of those things where the aircraft makers, airlines, airports, aviation authorities all have to align to enable the changes.
>"It's a genuine question, I'm not an aero engineer but I struggle to see the benefits of electrical propulsion beyond the "look how clever my engine is" bragging rights."
For super small private planes it might be worthwhile. ie a Piper Telsa. Mainly if you can reduce the service costs over a regular engine.
I strongly suspect this project is a combination of Greenwashing and a way for RR to score some Eco grants/tax-credits to do R&D for their small turbine on-site generator business.
If you can have 2.5MW on a pallet, compared to their current container size powerplant then a lot of on-site diesels could be replaced.
It's economic when oil prices are high but abandoned as soon as oil prices drop.
Main problem is that you can't tow at very high speeds (tugs would be massive and you would have to strengthen front landing gear) so it really slows down your airport operations.
Unless you can guarantee such tugs are available at all airports that the aircraft type would ever serve you still need the engines to be able to run in taxi state so don't gain as much
In this version. Remember how all those new security laws were temporary after 9/11 and were only going to be used against terrorists?
This phone shows you drove past Mr' known to police' so you are now also a suspect, subject to being the right (ie wrong) skin color.
amanfromMars is widely believed to be an AI, or just a Markov chain seeded by Fox twitter feed.
This might just be the debug log.
(There is another theory that Fox's twitter feed is just a Markov chain fed by amanfromMars)
Interestingly that was the British Army rule upto just before D-Day
Then somebody realised it might give the hun a bit of an excuse and it as changed,
- listening to Al Murray and James Holland's excellent podcast. "We have ways of making you talk"
That's part of the same faulty thinking though. A full test in a proper test range for this mirror (designed to support itself only in zero g) would have been complicated and expensive. A quick knife edge test with a business card would have shown the error - but you aren't going to do a dumb high school physics test on a $Bn program
Just cos it's Friday, Im bored "working" from home and el'reg readers like to geek out.
The error is interesting.
To precisely test a mirror like this you assemble a bunch of lens to have exactly the same optical specification on a smaller scale (ie. a unit test) called a null corrector.
Obviously vital that you get all the spacings in this precisely correct .
So you make a very precise length metal rod out of Invar, a super hard version of stainless steel that changes very little with temperature (and is a real basterd to machine - I still have scars)
You focus a microscope on the end of the rod and then you know that when you replace the rod with the optics and are in the same focus you are in the same place. This way you never touch the rod.
You don't want some PFY to damage the ends of this rod you put a lens cap over it with a little hole for the microscope to look down. You then paint the cap back so you don't get any stray light.
Unfortunately a speck of paint came off the cap and went down the hole. The microscope got focussed on the resulting area of shiny metal on the top of the cap, a gnat's whatsit above than the end of the rod. The rest of the optics got assembled to this wrong position, the mirror got polished to match the optics and a lot of astronomers got very pissed off - and a bunch of us doing software deconvolution of out of focus images got bought a lot of very nice Sun wokstations. So it all worked out in the end.
I think you have your urban myths crossed.
The mirror was made by PE on the same production line as the keyhole spy satelites - the Hubble being optically a keyhole facing up.
The polishing was 70s technology so if the polishing machine was computer controlled it was only for very small values of "computer". The shape fsck-up as nothing to do with the computer it was pure user error.
Kodak had bid to make a pair of mirrors so to have a backup if anything went wrong in polishing.
Although if they had used the same standard testing technique as PE and made the same mistake any error would have equally applied to both. The polishing technique had nothing to do with the error.
The big failing was PE not to have done a very simple test of the mirror to show any gross error - it relied on having a single super precise test that it did wrong. And then made a super precise mirror to the wrong shape. The lesson is that it's often worth doing a quick and dirty back of the envelope measurement/calculation before trusting the 10decimal place answer from the super precise machine with the flashing lights
They didn't do this test because of time constraints, although ironically Hubble then sat in storage for years after the challenger accident.
The "who supplied this ad" link will simply go to an ad agency or PR company. Presumably they have no obligation to reveal who their client is and then if their client is a single person or think tank they have no obligation to say where they got the money.
That's what they did here with $5K limits on corporate donations. Certain oil/mining companies simply hired a bunch of consultants. Coincidentally the consultants then each donated $5K personally, of their own free will, to a campaign for the candidate who looked favourably on the extraction industries.
>what is the difference between getting access to Linux command line with and without WSL ?
If you are using the Windows machine purely as an admin console = nothing
If you need to test and develop the server stuff locally then I have a Windows laptop (email/office/corporate stuff) a Linux desktop (development and test) and then cloud/remote server to deploy.
With WSL I could do a lot of the development on the laptop and then push directly to cloud rather than having to sneaker-net it to the laptop first. Which would be really handy in this current lockdown
The benefit to MSFT is that if I had any control over corporate IT would throw out the windows laptop and replace it with Linux.