Posts by F111F 272 publicly visible posts • joined 27 Jul 2010
Exactly. For those of who’ve taken said “training”, it was repetitive, uninformative, boring, and a waste of time to just check a training box. It was the exact. same. scenario. every damn time. We had the answer key available for the office so we’d only lose the minimum time possible taking the test. Good riddance.
DoD (and presumably the MoD), have green-colored batteries to prevent theft from supply for personal use. Amazingly, batteries go in short supply when the Christmas season comes 'round, as well as paper and pens/pencils when the school year starts. There is no mil-spec for AA batteries (though there certainly is for specialized batteries) that I know of.
SpaceX planned on extending 4 legs through the heat shield and using the Super Dracos to fly a powered descent, with parachute backup. NASA, understandably, was concerned that poking 4 holes through the heat shield was not a proven procedure, and a powered landing vs parachute was a radical departure from the norm. So, if SpaceX was willing to invest a billion or so on their own dime and possibly delay the Crew Dragon, they could do it. SpaceX wisely backed down and changed over to parachutes and water.
Boeing all along designed their Starliner capsule to have impact-cushioning bags and not interfere with the heat shield, so since the Russians had done it forever, NASA said it was OK to proceed. SpaceX was too far along with Dragon to redesign to include impact bags, so they stayed with water landings.
For very good reason. The Space industry is in its infancy, so until and if/when rocket transportation moves mainstream, let the rich folks pay their money/take their chances. They'll build up the knowledge and processes to build/operate/maintain a transportation node that can, hopefully, eventually translate to the public sector.
Just to nitpick (sorry). US Navy has plane captains. USAF has Dedicated Crew Chiefs. Same role, different names. DCCs come in a variety of ranks, from SRA to MSgt, depending on the size of the aircraft, how many crew chiefs are in the squadron, etc. But we try to see each jet has at least a SSgt or TSgt assigned. What it does mean, is they are assigned to that jet, primarily (though they can be tasked to work other jets and other duties as needed). They often take great pride in "their" jet, so much so that wives often refer to the jet as "the other woman".
Yeah, my incentive ride in and F-15B (76-130) required a 4 hour training session. We covered oxygen equipment, how to dress, secure, and even went through a mock ejection trainer. The pilot's briefing included: "..if we have to eject, you will hear me say "bailout, bailout, bailout". But if you're waiting for the 3rd "bailout", you'll be all by yourself."
Great ride. Got to see the Grand Canyon, inverted. Went past Mach 1, and got to do some acrobatics. One of the best 90min of my life.
Had something similar happen to an F-15A pilot. As he leveled off after takeoff, the canopy departed the airframe (crew chief fault for packing gear and preventing the canopy from locking fully...light went out, but it came unsecured at the push-over at altitude), taking with it all his baggage and the other equipment stored behind the seat. When he landed, the pyro actuation indicator was up, so when he taxied into his spot, we informed him he was sitting on a "hot" seat and he may want to vacate expediently...which he did.
Ironically, he was at our base to lead an inquiry for a jet that lost it's canopy the previous week...
There's a memorial at Upper Heyford to an F-111E crew that chose to attempt to avoid the village when landing instead of ejecting and the aircraft hitting the village/school (probably, you never know what's going to happen when an F-111 goes pilotless). The resulting crash just missed me by about 30yds as I rounded the end of the runway. I saw the fireball in my rear and sideview mirrors and felt the "thump" as the airframe impacted. Unfortunately, the crew did not survive the ejection (the capsule did eject, but with only a partial rocket motor burn so not high enough to fully engage the parachute). When we got to the capsule (another driver and I), it was...obvious the crew hit the instrument panel and had not survived, despite restraints, etc. To top it off, the aircrew and jet were from my squadron, where I was the maintenance officer...bad day all 'round.
To be fair, SpaceX's testing revealed that the parachute modeling NASA used for previous missions was, in fact, faulty and had to be re-modeled. SpaceX chose to use newer material (Zylon?) as well to handle the stress of the chute opening sequence. Lessons learned and all that.
The problem with pre-determining the gender of mission personnel is that they didn't get the position via quality of work, but their glands... It also predetermines that only one of the crew will be female, when the two best-qualified might both be female.
Let the men and women of NASA compete equally for all positions and hang their gender.
If I offered a service to recharge your car (nightly, weekly, etc) from a giant battery/capacitor/generator in the bed of my F-350 (or Euro equivalent), would you consider it? There are some quiet generators that shouldn't wake the neighborhood, or I could recharge the capacitor/battery elsewhere...
Just as some offer mobile car washing service...this might be a niche application to apartment dwellers or those on the interstate who run out of juice (though that may be a bit far-fetched).
Just thinkin...
So, why doesn't ESA buy a couple, one manned, one unmanned, launch on Ariane 6 out of Guiana, and recover in Europe? Seems like a sweet deal, ESA gets it's own spaceship to transport to LEO/ISS to do various experiments/things, and returns said euro-astros and experiments directly home to Europe, since this thing can land on any 10,000ft runway.
Quote: "...shift munitions from storage magazines to the hangar and flight deck, ready to be loaded onto helicopters and fighter jets."
Nope. Will still require munitions types configuring the bomb bodies with tail fins, guidance kits, fuses, arming wire, testing, etc. for the particular mission. Even AA missiles need fins added from storage, ASM (Air to Surface Missiles) require testing to ensure the electronics are working properly. Nothing "ready" about it. Torpedoes I'm not sure about, though, they may come as an all-up round in their coffin.
Speaking as one of those in the second most important job in any Air Force, Aircraft Maintenance, we are only demi-gods to the flyers, but better than all those "nonners" who don't produce sorties, load bombs, or otherwise inhabit the flightline. The pecking order goes down from there.
Because your weather* is so damn dodgy all the time.** Luke AFB in Arizona has 361 days of sunshine on average each year.***
*Why is the UK so green? The three Ms...Moss, Mold, and Mildew...
**Observation from 6 years in the UK, 4 at RAF Lakenheath and 2 at RAF Upper Heyford.
***Observation from 4 years at Luke AFB.
Or...your gov't/agency/company could just sign up for data sharing from the Space Fence 2.0 coming on line shortly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Fence
FTA: "As of November 2014, the USAF Strategic Command had "announced data-sharing agreements with at least seven countries and 44 companies, but [the details of] those agreements have [not] been made public" and it is unclear how much of the new Space Fence data will be shared.
Countries with space situational awareness data-sharing agreements in place with the USAF include Australia, Japan, Italy, Canada, France, the Republic of Korea and the United Kingdom. It also "has agreements with the European Space Agency and Europe’s Eumetsat weather satellite organization."
If Siri/Alexa record conversations involving illegal activity, does the company (or their contractor) have a duty to turn these over to the police? Corollary: Would a privileged conversation be still considered privileged if both parties knew an "always-on" microphone was recording and sending their conversation to a non-privileged third party?
Can the police acquire Siri/Alexa recordings from a warrant if the police believe illicit behavior may have been recorded by the device?
Lastly, my parents, brother, and son all have these devices in their homes and all require yelling at the top of one's voice to get the damn things to respond. When there are multiple noise sources (conversations, music, kids, etc), they have to stand over the device, speaking loudly to get it to respond. Sorry, not sorry, I don't have one myself.
The US and Russia both have systems that allow them to differentiate between nuclear and non-nuclear explosions. I can only hope the Chinese and other nuke-owning nations either have a system, or check in before retaliatory lobbing commences. The US has satellites in orbit to track explosions (they can even trace missile plumes from air to air missiles and SAMs), and receiving stations are manned 24/7. In addition there are radiation tracking devices on aircraft to determine exactly what type of fissile material was used. The first thing would be the lack of a missile plume or radar track of any launch. Along with missing that, and observation of the explosion would determine a non-nuclear event, and hence something not requiring an immediate nuclear retaliatory strike. Can't say that armed forces wouldn't go up a level or two of readiness as a precaution from a possible terroristic event, and/or to mobilize for disaster support as a result, though.
Icon: Because we are talking about nukes here...
Actually, you can blame my wife for the Flying-Sardine-Can business model. She will hunt the cheapest flight, no matter the routing, restrictions, etc. And, she has many, many, many sisters/brethren who only consider cost. I finally put my foot down and took control over bookings. I may not book the cheapest flights, but we get there in one hop, at a convenient time, can check bags, and have decent leg room.
Your missing:
1) Fuel. Yeah, lots of power (solar is available on the Moon) required to make it, but getting H2 and O2 liquified and in fuel tanks gets you back off the Moon, and allows you to bring more stuff to the Moon.
2) Water, as in the drinking kind. See note above about being able to bring more stuff if you don't have to bring water along.
3) Crops. Water is fairly essential in growing food. See note about bringing more stuff if you don't have to bring so much pre-packaged food.
4) Etcetera, etcetera.
Just do the damn job. Let history sort out that something was the first, or somehow important. NASA got it right when they said: "When you have the option of just switching the people, the mission becomes more important than a cool milestone," NASA spokeswoman Stephanie Schierholz told the New York Times.
….was cancelled... "When you have the option of just switching the people, the mission becomes more important than a cool milestone," NASA spokeswoman Stephanie Schierholz told the New York Times.
Just do the damn job, history will figure out later if it was significant enough to note for whatever "milestone" was achieved.
The in flight abort is scheduled for later this Spring and will use the same DM-1 capsule. The first stage has yet to be identified. The plan is to demonstrate the abort at MaxQ, triggering the sequence in the most stressful part of the launch profile. I've heard two versions of how it might happen. First, just send an abort command at MaxQ and see what happens. Second, detonate the first stage (tricking the AFTS or through planted explosives?) at MaxQ and let the abort computers do their thing. It'll be fireworks whichever method is used.
(Icon for blowing stuff up)
Plan their dives and then dive their plan, always go with a buddy, don't exceed the tables, and abort the dive when things start to go wonky. Computers are nice backups, and that's it. They can preserve the history of your dive to download later. Anyone who relies on their dive computer to tell them it's time to come up is too dangerous a diver for me. Algorithms are notoriously different between different manufacturers, and when the diver can pick how aggressive they want the algorithm to work, you're just cheating death. [Note: If you're a commercial/tech diver, ignore the above, I'm talking to all us recreational divers, you lot get my respect for the dangerous working conditions and computers are absolutely necessary].
Side note: If you ever get the chance, diving in the Red Sea is glorious...not Sharm-el-Sheikh, but down further South along Saud Arabia...lots of reefs that are rarely (or never) visited by divers. Wish the Kingdom would open up tourism for divers, was lucky I had the chance while I was living there.
Can't speak for @Jake, or his particular country, but if Afghanistan and other fights are any indication, a well-armed and determined populace will tie up any army and cause all kinds of trouble. Eventually, said army will withdraw because the only alternative is genocide. That's why Afghanistan continually kicks invading armies in the 'nards, including the current scenario playing out. The American forefathers had just gone through such a scenario with only 30% of the population for independence. They knew very well that a well-armed population is much more powerful than any army, the obvious exception being use of weapons of mass destruction/genocide which happens to be politically unpalatable in these modern times.
Crew Dragon and Orion are already optimized for different roles. Dragon for LEO, short duration missions, acting as a lifeboat for a few months before deorbiting. Orion for long-duration, beyond LEO missions where the radiation protection and support system requirements are much more critical. You could use an Orion for runs to the ISS (common docking mechanism, I suppose), but that's like taking the Class A motorhome RV to Tesco for a milk/bread run. A Dragon run around the Moon has been proposed and could be a thing, I suppose, but it's really stretching the limits of the life support/protection systems to do that. That would be like taking the family of four across the USA in a Ford Escort, possible, but the memories made probably won't be of the sights as much as the smells. But, if Elon's looking for a volunteer...
Ejection seats are not "tuned" to a passenger. They are designed to save a person fitting a range of height/weight values. That said, a 0/0 system (0 height/ 0 forward velocity) is one hell of a ride and can/has done damage to vertebrae, spinal cords, improperly placed arms/legs, etc., sometimes forcing fighter pilots to switch to trash-haulers after an ejection. It is seen as slightly better than dying.
I imagine an call center guy taking these and asking the following questions before dispatching help...
“Sir, please calm down, I cannot understand you when you’re screaming in pain.” (Picks his nose)
“Is this emergency a result of YouTube, Snapchat, Reddit, Instagram, FaceBook or other social media posting.”?
“Were the words ‘Hold my phone’, ‘Hey y’all watch this’, or ‘Hold my beer’ uttered by the person or persons in need of help”?
“If you answered in the affirmative to either of these conditions we are unable to assist you at this time, have a nice day.”
<quote>Yashar Hezaveh, co-author of the paper and researcher at Stanford, told The Register: “It’s hard to say” what features the CNN learned to extract to arrive at its output answers.
“In fact we don’t really know. As we show the examples to neural networks and ask them to make the correct predictions, they may find very complex features in the data that they can use for their predictions. We can sometimes look at the features, but they will be highly non-intuitive.
“I usually think about it like opening the brain of someone and looking inside it: it doesn’t tell us much about what the person is actually thinking about or how they see the world.”</quote>
They're using results of a computer analysis but don't understand how the "neural network" got the results? How do you replicate and/or validate the conclusions/results independently?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
