"and for some reason, also sport" #W1A
41 posts • joined 11 Oct 2012
So apart from the facts that:
- It's not a reveal of _a_ spaceship cabin because its CGI.
- It's not a reveal of _the_ spaceship cabin because the "spaceship" will have 4 seats, not 6.
- It's not a reveal of a _spaceship_ cabin because it doesn't reach space.
the rest of it is probably perfectly accurate.
A very interesting (if quite long) podcast episode from the often excellent Omega Tau on host Markus Voelter's flight with the USAF dispaly team Thunderbirds, including the excellent medical briefing and flight briefing he went through. The mind boggles that this french guy seemed to just rock up and go.
This place is a message… and part of a system of messages… pay attention to it! Sending this message was important to us. We considered ourselves to be a powerful culture.
This place is not a place of honor…no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here… nothing valued is here.
What is here is dangerous and repulsive to us. This message is a warning about danger.
The danger is in a particular location… it increases toward a center… the center of danger is here… of a particular size and shape, and below us.
The danger is still present, in your time, as it was in ours.
The danger is to the body, and it can kill.
The form of the danger is an emanation of energy.
The danger is unleashed only if you substantially disturb this place physically. This place is best shunned and left uninhabited.
If I understand it correctly, there's no equivalent ITU-R standard for HDR yet, in a simialr manner to Rec. 709 for HDTV.
I think that means that there's no consistent method of processing HDR across capture device, processing, transmission and display. So you will get a different interpretation of HDR depending on what equipment you use at each stage of the process.
Would much prefer HDR to UHDTV any day.
3,000 telemetry channels.
Video (internal to the vehicle and external) and debris analysis.
"Detailed close-out photos of stage construction"
Or basically the same press release with added expert opinion http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/07/spacex-falcon-9-failure-investigation-focuses-update/
Last time LockMart got some traction with this idea, the timescales quoted were 2017 prototype, 2022 full vewrsion. So it looks as if timescales have slipped by 2/3 years. Maybe their breakthrough is more akin to reducing the "fusion is always 30 years away" to "fusion is always 10 years away".
OTOH it would be really, really neat if they made it work.
It doesn't fall under aircraft regulation.
Commercial aircraft are type approved (in brief, the regulatory body says "This aircraft is safe to fly").
RLV's are covered (currently) by the FAA's experimental permit regime and (once in service) by a launch licence regime under the Commercial Space Launch Amendement Act 2002. The FAA/US Gov are specifically saying that the vehicles are *not* certified as safe by them and all participants will have to sign a waiver to the effect that they absolve the FAA, the operator, manufacturers and subcontractors of all liability, except in the case of gross negligence.
Participants also have to be presented with, amongst other things, stats on the operating history and fatalities of *all* spacecraft.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022