Re: They land back to earh requires an ungodly amount of fuel
Instead of drogue chutes Space-X use "supersonic grid fins" that look kind of like fly swatters to slow down the booster. You can see them at the top of the booster.
78 posts • joined 10 Sep 2007
Net Neutrality = Government tells ("regulates") ISPs that all traffic has to be treated equally.
Not "Micromanaging" the ISPs business.
"Freedom" of the small up and starting business to have the same access to customers as large established companies.
Certain vocal Republicans seem to equate the enforcement of equal treatment as a threat to "Freedom"; be it access to the internet, marriage, or lunch counters.
Electric motors driving each wheel, and a small *turbine* used to top up the battery when it drops below a certain level.
All the benefits of electric drive.
Smaller Battery required
Turbine runs at optimum load and only when necessary.
Reduced weight and complexity.
Why has no one done this?
The fact that products look similar from generation to generation is a sign of good design and forward thinking and vision.
It is the a function of a coherent design language that newer models look similar to previous generations.
The classic Porsche, Volvo, the first three generations of VW water cooled cars. The list could go on.
The Tech and Society suits looked better, I was surprised that only the Bio suit had fabric covering the joints.
Just wondering about planetary dust and grit......
I agree with the idea of subtle navigational lighting.
Coat? Of course: we're talking space coats :-P
A year and a half ago we changed over from Comcast (coax cable virtual monopoly) to Verizon FiOS (Fi bre O ptic S ervice).
Since the change we have noticed a significant decline in the quality of our streaming video from Netflix; much buffering and lower resolution images.
From what we can tell it is a problem with the Verizon FiOS Content Delivery Network
Seriously considering changing back at the end of our contract.
Disgruntled in Philadelphia, PA
It is worth noting, that despite it's problems in other areas, no Space Shuttle (STS) ever self immolated either!
Yes, it's dangerous work, this is why SpaceX are flying the Dragon uncrewed so many times before attempting a crew
(for the immolation of course!).
"Challenger" never exploded, it was torn apart in by aerodynamic stresses when the booster knocked the stack out of alignment according to the Rogers Report.
If anyone has wondered why the orbiter hangs on the side of the tank, instead of like on top in all of those Chelsey Bonestell illustrations, it's because the fragile orbiter (its wings in particular) is partially shielded by the shock cone from the main tank.
None of this diminishes the loss of the brave astronauts.
Isn't the Helium atom smaller than they Hydrogen atom because of its extra mass and self attractive forces? I seem to remember reading some where that despite being a tad heavy than H, He was smaller and 'slipperier'.
The note about being more detectable because of rarity is right on.
The UK has a standard sales tax with the VAT. Here in the 'states each state, and sometimes municipality, sets their own rates.
This variability is why national sellers advertise the base rate. you're on your own figuring out what will be added when you get to the till.
I agree that most manufacturers are guilty of manufacturing under similar conditions so applying pressure to change by switching brands will be unlikely to work.
But since much of their profit comes from frequent fashion driven turn over we can announce that we will not buy new gear until the manufacturers clean up their production. By keeping old hardware longer one can apply some (not much, but better than no) pressure.
Probably because the stage separation would occur far down range, over an ocean, from where the launch site was.
If they wanted quick/easy turn around it is likely that the designers plan to have the first stage return to home site to save transport costs.
Of course, given a Florida Launch, you could have it fly a path similar to the Shuttles Trans-Atlantic Abort (TAL) and land the first stage at a prepared site in Africa or Spain then return home by ship.
Ah, that familiar old canard: we can't use expensive renewables because it would burden the poor.
The poor are, by nature, already burdened.
Time and time again in the U.S. a fuel tax that would support alternative fuel or mass transit has been defeated because "it unfairly burdens the poor".
The poor then have no transit, buy a car, use cheap gas, then get devastated when the price spikes.
The well off use much more energy than the poor and are therefore more affected. The poor would be, in the long run, better served by more expensive, but less price volatile, forms of energy.
There are some relevant points to consider when seriously discussing routine access to Mars
1) Pace of technologic development and cost: Gagarin to Armstrong/Aldrin was 8 years, but the Apollo craft was very delicate, very expensive, pushed every envelope to the breaking point and was therefore very dangerous despite the relatively few serious accidents given the nature of the beast.
2) Moving from experimental to production technology: One goal of the new companies is to make the craft more reliable, use less experimental technology, and make it more comfortable. Both Apollo and Shuttle are experimental technology that require large staffs of highly trained people to operate; the ground operations for Shuttle are a significant part of the program. Early autos required frequent maintenance (tire repair, water, oil, etc...) and still broke down frequently. Today cars go forever despite the lack of maintenance we give them. Form factor aside the Orion and Dragon craft are as completely different than the Apollo craft as a Model T is from a Honda Civic.
3) Sustainable interplanetary infrastructure: for reliable access to Mars we need to invest in something like the Aldrin Cycler. A quick shot to the Mars, like the one to the Moon, is akin to the Lewis and Clark expedition. To open up the frontier the government, decades later, invested in the railroads which provided frequent, reliable, and sustainable round trip capacity. They took longer to build than the carts and boats that took Lewis and Clark, but made settling the West possible.
Just my 2c
Our local transit agency (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority or SEPTA for short) after running 4 generations of cars with 3+2 seating has now seen the light and is using only 2+2 in its next build of cars.
People are getting *ahem* bigger, and it became obvious that almost no one wanted the middle seat, so out they go and there is more standing room.
I love albums, and I thing that even the youngsters will buy them for the whole concept, if it is a whole concept album vis-a-vis "Dark Side of the Moon". The "Two Hits Plus Filler" deserves to die.
Some "Filler" turns out to be good, but that's why Amazon and iTunes have their "Discovery Features"
Death of the Music Industry? Hardly. Death of the "Buy it Blind" model? Yep, Sure, Buh-Bye!
As long ago as 1985 (remember 1985?) a sage man once surmised the death of the industry was from "Sales are Slumbing... Could it be One Too Many Lousy Records?!?"
*Eric Buchard, et al...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020