Slashdot Mirror

DVD players started off at a fairly reasonable price? My first player was a consumer-level Toshiba SD-3107 for $700.

Of course, there was also the cheap 2107 for $500.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/televis ion/1280081.html

Paying for a hi-def format bundled with a videogame machine for $600 doesn't seem so outrageous in comparison. Assuming the game portion isn't terrible.

Not unless they got Popular Mechanics to back date a fake article to June, 2005.

So, apparently the hoax and viral marketing theories are both out the window, unless it's a hoax that's been years in the making.

First of all, WT7 DID NOT have a plane crash into it, and yet still fell (symetrically and into its own footprint), next:

the empire state building had a plane crash into it: At 9:49 a.m. on Saturday July 28, 1945, a B-25 Mitchell bomber accidentally crashed into the north side between the 79th and 80th floors, where the offices of the National Catholic Welfare Council were located. The fire was extinguished in 40 minutes. 14 people were killed in the accident[3].(wikipedia)

Regardless of this, the building was designed to withstand impacts by aircraft of this size, so it shouldn't (and indeed thats not the official explanation) have been the impact that caused the problem. if you think it was the fire, then compare this picture of the WTC fire towers where you can see a small area on one tower and a larger but still relatively small section on the other smoking (black indicating low oxygen therefore cooler fires) with a few visible flames, with this and thisimage of the windsor building in madrid, that was totally engulfed in flames from about halfway up the building to the top, and burned for 10 hours, yet didn't collapse, with only parts not including the inner support section collapsing after burning for hours, as you might expect. Note that the tower, while smaller, had a similar construction to the wtc, being a central support column and perimeter supports, and that the tower was "built using normal strength concrete and before modern fire proofing standards, without any sprinkler system. It was undergoing a complete refurbishment, including the installation of various active fire prevention and resistance measures, when the fire began at around 11pm on 14 February 2005." (see here and here for more pictures and (you may say biased) info and here for a case study of the construction and result of the huge fire. Many other buildings have burned for similar or longer, and not collapsed. If you still think it's reasonable to accept three world first events on the same day at face value, in your words "then you are, frankly, a fucking moron.""(in a less offensive way, if it was conspiracy theorists saying that al queda did it with planes, and the government saying that they demolished it to make room for new towers or something, then would you still think it was rediculous?)

also if you think it was "not an ordinary fire" and that the addition of the jet fuel caused the extra heat that differentiated them from every other fire in history, then, from the debunking 911 myths on popular mechanics:

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsiblefor the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."

therefore apart from a hot start and some mild damage to the outer structure (which was not intended for holding up the bulk of the weight of the building but rather to resist torsional forces from wind etc, and therfore if that had failed would be much more likely to have caused an assymetrical toppling, rather than a symetrical fall), it was no different to any other fire in the history of steel/concrete buildings. So I ask again, why did three buildings fall on the same day from fire, and never before or since in history?

straw man. The steel didn't melt. It was hot enough to significantly weaken it (ask a blacksmith), but not to melt it.

"Peter Tully, presid

1. Not that I doubt the Pentagon was hit by an aircraft, but it is documented fact that several security camera tapes were confiscated after the crash. Release them in their entirety.

2. Explain to me why standard operating procedures for NORAD that would normally require specific orders to disregard, were disregarded that day.

3. Explain to me how WTC-7 came to be the only steel-framed structure in recorded history to suffer a complete collapse as a result of fire alone. (FEMA's own report offers an elaborate theory which they say has a "low probability of occurance")

4. In light of the signifigance (particularly to insurers, architechts, engineers) of WTC-7's collapse-due-to-fire, why were the building remains sold to China for scrap before they could be fully analyzed?

The building had been evacuated hours before the collapse, it was not necessary for rescue crews. This is a major event in the building industry: if steel structures can collapse from fire alone, insurance rates would have to be adjusted, architects would have to reconsider the design of thousands of structures.

5. If Flight 93 was destroyed by being crashed (intentionally or accidentally) into a field in Shanksville, PA, why did it leave a debris field over 8+ miles?

i read this one

There's a guy that sells motorcycles powered by helicopter turbines. Jay Leno has one.

On that very page -- right after the table of everyday G forces -- is a link to a Popular Mechanics article which in turn references "a classic medical study published nearly a decade ago in the medical journal Spine", which most likely is available on PubMed should anyone want to check it out.

Now let me quote from the PM article (emphasis mine):

Time Matters
When discussing the effects of g-forces on the body, time emerges as one of the most critical factors. When it comes to the higher-g sections of amusement rides (see the illustration above right), exposure to high g-forces lasts only a fraction of a second. Blackouts and other health problems associated with g's require exposure to g-forces that are either greater in magnitude or of much longer duration than those achieved by today's amusement rides.

The issue of g-forces on the body was explored in detail in a classic medical study published nearly a decade ago in the medical journal Spine. In their investigation, doctors and engineers found that the normal movements we go through every day subjects us to far greater gravitational pull than that felt on any amusement park ride. According to the study, you experience 10.4 g's when you plop down into a chair. Hopping off a step generates 8.1 g's. A cough is a 3.5 g experience, a sneeze generates 2.9 g's. By comparison, 4-g amusement rides are wimpy.

I would suggest a more humble approach in the future; there are still people around that can teach you a thing or two, young padawan.

And how does something like that help us fight an enemy that puts up a roadside bomb?

Troops need body armor and armored trucks. Not, useless debt building toys that are made to fight a cold war enemy, long gone.

Want more info http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/25 30001.html

Here's an AP photo of the wreckage.

A private sector structural engineer and blast expert was on the scene early:

"I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

A team of well-qualified experts including one from Controlled Demolition supplied data and insight for an (IMHO strident) article about the WTC collapses. The current leading theory is erosion of safety margin when structural steel was weakened by prolonged fire, followed by increased stresses from thermal expansion.

Notice that since the jet fuel burned out after about ten minutes, the temperature of a kerosene fire is irrelevant.

WTC 7 was on fire after structural damage from falling objects, and was well past its design tolerances because the design case assumed that there would be living firefighters to control any blaze that got started.

Popular Mechanics ran an article discussing the top myths surrounding the 9/11 disaster using science and everything: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/12 27842.html

It seems to answer the questions that you've been asking. These have all been answered before, but apparently not well enough.

The magazine "Popular Mechanics" bought a bunch of iMacs, and when 40% of them died, the magazine looked into it: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/compute rs/1707756.html

The thermal-imaging camera shot is interesting.

I think you're talking about the NHMFL - it's in Tallahassee, at the Seminary West of the Suwannee.

This Popular Mechanics article also speaks of something (AC Gravity) which also cannot really be explained using current quantum physics.

Now, IANAQP (I am not a Quantum Physicist), but the two models seem to be somewhat similar to me as a lay person who reads a lot about physics. One (Hyperdrive) deals with rotating magenetic fields, and the other (AC Gravity) seems to deal with rotating electric fields. Physics tells us that these are aspects of the same fundamental force, electromagnetism.

I've seen a lot of complaints about how 'unrealistic' this idea is, but could it just be that the physicists in question are uncovering new portions of reality? Could the 4 additional dimentions needed for the Hyperdrive (mentioned in the New Scientist article) be similar to the 7 additional dimentions used by M Theory?

Don't forget that most turbocharged engines will give up some fuel efficiency as compared to a naturally aspirated engine of the same displacement even when operating under light loads. This is because in order to handle (without blowing head gaskets or detonation) the increased charge density provided by forced induction, they must use a lower static compression ratio. Lower compression ratio generally equals less efficient combustion.

This is why Saab developed this.

Well, it was a crummy little conference with no one to watch it, look at the video. It was obvious that they just finally convinced an ex official and used his name to get into the headlines, to draw more attention to the subject. Thats understandable, unfortunately the old guy seemed nuttier than a bag of peanuts. But laser weapons aren't joke matterial anymore really. A simple search on popular mechanics will bring up a few examples of currently released projects http://www.popularmechanics.com/search?searchKeywo rds=Laser+Weapon&x=0&y=0. Imagine the ones they havent released. Couple that with videos of other shit like this http://www.unexplainable.net/artman/publish/articl e_2261.shtml (click on picture in middle) recorded on NASA sats and other shit like this http://www.azfamily.com/cgi-bin/video/wmPlayer.pl? title=www.azfamily.com/20040716_UFO.wmv&vsect=News . And last, but most certainly not least, check out President Eisenhowers farewell address to the nation http://www.disclosureproject.org/videogallery.htm. Fucking creepy I say.

The clincher will be when we finally get to the moon like our president says we will. What will go up first, a science lab, or a military/security installation?

Some links from my research: Hypersonic Sound: Popular Science http://www.prisonplanet.com/audios_the_next_big_th ing.html Popular Mechanics http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/audio/1 279591.html (explains acoustic heterodyning) Sorry - I've lost the link that said commercial ships at sea are not allowed to use heavy weapons by international treaty. It was in a story published on Sunday, March 6, 2004 by the Los Angeles Times but that factual tidbit was not from an authority anyway, and no source was provided for it.

Exploring space is horrendously expensive especially when America does it. I remember reading years ago, that the Russian space achievements during the cold war period were achieved at a tenth of the cost of the American achievements. Yes America reached the moon but what have we got to show for it? Apart from an inflated ego zilch! that was up until about twenty ago, when a lab in the University of Wisconsin discovered with little fanfare, something remarkable.

Read

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=1&c=y/

Shmitt (The only scientist to visit the moon) reckons that He3 is worth about $40000 an ounce or $1428 dollars a gram , gold is worth around 15 dollars a gram. If Shmitt is correct in his estimate of the value of He3, this makes He3 nearly a hundred times more valuable than gold. Had the astronaughts have struck gold on the moon, I have little doubt that we would be living on the moon by now.

There are many news articles about He3 here http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/gallery/

The science of He3 here http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/Research/he3.html/

The thing that will make human endevours in space viable, is when space makes a profit.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/12 27842.html?page=1&c=y Try that instead of the terrorist propiganda.

http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/gallery/

and here

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=1&c=y/

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=1&c=y/

...

Worst of all, GM long ago stopped listening to its customers, and that's just plain bad Car-Ma! ;-)

The turning point occurred in the late 90's, when a group of visionary engineers, under the tutelage of then CEO Robert Stempel, attempted to "reinvent the corporation." Among their achievements, they built, on the relatively small shoestring budget of $350 million, the world's most advanced and efficient automobile -- the EV1. The EV1 assembly line in East Lansing, Michigan established new benchmarks in low volume custom manufacturing -- a key technology for the future, then and now dominated by Toyota Corporation.

But Stempel and his lieutenants were soon ousted by a corporate coup when GM's earnings took a downturn during a recession, and the Beancounters took over once again.

In 1997, GM showed off a hybrid electric version of the EV1 at the Los Angeles Auto Show -- just as Honda and Toyota were introducing their hybrids to the world. But the Beancounters at GM Corporate quietly tucked away their hybrid, never to be seen again, and openly derided the Japanese offerings for selling "below cost" -- forgetting the painful lessons that America has had to learn in so many other electronic-related technologies. ... (source)

They don't bury the dead in New Orleans. The highest point in the city is only 6 ft. above sea level, which makes for watery graves. Fearful that rotting corpses caused epidemics, the city limited ground burials in 1830. Mausoleums built on soggy cemetery grounds became the final resting place for generations. Beyond providing a macabre tourist attraction, these "cities of the dead" serve as a reminder of the Big Easy's vulnerability to flooding. The reason water rushes into graves is because New Orleans sits atop a delta made of unconsolidated material that has washed down the Mississippi River.

Think of the city as a chin jutting out, waiting for a one-two punch from Mother Nature. The first blow comes from the sky. Hurricanes plying the Gulf of Mexico push massive domes of water (storm surges) ahead of their swirling winds. After the surges hit, the second blow strikes from below. The same swampy delta ground that necessitates above-ground burials leaves water from the storm surge with no place to go but up.

The fact that New Orleans has not already sunk is a matter of luck. If slightly different paths had been followed by Hurricanes Camille, which struck in August 1969, Andrew in August 1992 or George in September 1998, today we might need scuba gear to tour the French Quarter.

"In New Orleans, you never get above sea level, so you're always going to be isolated during a strong hurricane," says Kay Wilkins of the southeast Louisiana chapter of the American Red Cross.

During a strong hurricane, the city could be inundated with water blocking all streets in and out for days, leaving people stranded without electricity and access to clean drinking water. Many also could die because the city has few buildings that could withstand the sustained 96- to 100-mph winds and 6- to 8-ft. storm surges of a Category 2 hurricane. Moving to higher elevations would be just as dangerous as staying on low ground. Had Camille, a Category 5 storm, made landfall at New Orleans, instead of losing her punch before arriving, her winds would have blown twice as hard and her storm surge would have been three times as high.

Yet knowing all this, area residents have made their potential problem worse. "Over the past 30 years, the coastal region impacted by Camille has changed dramatically. Coastal erosion combined with soaring commercial and residential development in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama have all combined to significantly increase the vulnerability of the area," says Sandy Ward Eslinger, of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's Coastal Services Center in Charleston, S.C. Early Warning

Emergency planners believe that it is a foregone conclusion that the Big Easy someday will be hit by a scouring storm surge. And, given the tremendous amount of coastal-area development, this watery "big one" will produce a staggering amount of damage. Yet, this doesn't necessarily mean that there will be a massive loss of lives.

The key is a new emergency warning system developed by Gregory Stone, a professor at Louisiana State University (LSU). It is called WAVCIS, which stands for wave-current surge information system. Within 30 minutes to an hour after raw data is collected from monitoring stations in the Gulf, an assessment of storm-surge damage would be available to emergency planners. Disaster relief agencies then would be able to mobilize resources--rescue personnel, the Red Cross, and so forth.

The $4.5 million WAVCIS project, which is now coming on line, will fill a major void in the Louisiana storm warning system, which was practically nonexistent compared to those of other Gulf Coast states. A system of 20 "weat

Popular Mechanics also did a piece on the disaster that was just waiting to happen in New Orleans. Check it out.

Popular Mechanics also did a piece on the disaster that was just waiting to happen in New Orleans. Check it out.

Despite the title, it's doesn't look like a replication of the NASA shuttle. The phrase "reuseable orbiter" used in the article seems closer. It looks more like a capsule to which they've added some semblance of "wings" to allow a little bit of maneuvarbility and more landing options. Hell some of the designs for the CEV look not dissimilar, and that is supposed to be NASAs next generation that they are seriously banking on.

Jedidiah.

No No, the fuel is up there already http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=1&c=y/

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=1&c=y/

What I suggest is a helium3 fusion reactor is built on the moon by telepresence (hands at a distance), part of the infrastructure would have to be transport. I would guess the helium3 would be in a different place (where the moon gets the most sunlight?) to the deuterium (the moon's poles?).

The first payload to the moon could be a fission reactor, coupled to a telepresence machine shop and a seed supply of raw materials. This would construct mobile mining technology and once the necessary minerals have been acquired the production of solar panels which would facilitate more distance travelled by the remote mining equipment. If it was done correctly it would grow exponentially

The Columbia tragedy shows that entering the earths atmosphere at 17,000 miles an hour in the equivalent of a flying brick is not a very good idea. De-orbitting space craft should be powered if reusable, otherwise we are stuck with the Russian method, crude but tried and tested.

The only way to have an economic and *safe* powered de-orbit method, is for rocket fuel to be manufactured in space, the obvious place for this is the moon.

We must manufacture the requisite materials for a biosphere in space before we send up wetware, all the right ingredients exist in space they just need assembling in the correct order.

We could send up wetware like this

http://www.orbital.com/SpaceLaunch/Pegasus/

One at a time please :)

I'm not sure, but I think it is. We are still in the competition phase for the new CEV (Crew Exploration Vehicle) contract, and the final award won't be presented until January of next year. The design shown in the NYT article is the one proposed by Northrop-Grumman, but Lockheed Martin is also developing a CEV, one that more resembles a space plane. You can read the article at http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1534 782.html?page=1&c=y for more. It doesn't seem like they say much about how it's going to get into orbit though.

This summer, researchers at the University of Wisconsin Fusion Technology Institute in Madison reported having successfully initiated and maintained a fusion reaction using deuterium and helium-3 fuel.

From

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=3&c=y

Perhaps you could write to them and tell them they dreamt it.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1283 056.html?page=1&c=y/

about mining the moon for He3.

>>Then the ATM displays "bait" information on all sides except the front side.

Been there, done that

The famous Sandia Z-machine is more of a quarter shrinker than a rail gun.

Sadly, the evolution of the English language nowadays seems to be directed by bad science fiction and gory video games. Real rail guns were projectile weapons so large they must be transported by rail - they can't be towed or moved with a truck without being disassembled because they are too heavy for roadbeds - and they have names like "Gustav", "Big Bertha" and "Schlanke Emma".

If the Z-machine was a gun (which it's not) it oughta be called a capacitive discharge cannon, not a rail gun. But I guess that's too hard to spell for kids today?

Those who ignore history are apparently in charge of revising the english language. Wikipedia and dictionary.com both use the "new" definition of railgun (although at least wiki has the grace to mention real railguns in passing).

Future historians are going to hate us for this one.

Oh my god, this already exists in Spain: Mobipay, Paybox. Little success, by the way.

Yep, and people have been doing it for YEARS in Scandinavia

If you like turbine engines, you should look up a company in Louisiana somewhere that puts old Bell JetRanger engines into Chevy pickup trucks. They also sell a jet-powered motorcycle, of their own design -- Jay Leno owns one.

I wonder if this new concrete may enhance the concrete submarine programme for deep submersibles.

Being in something with a bit more toughness, and better tensile strenght might be more reassuring. A little less like going to sea in an eggshell.

Holy cow are you ever out of it! Let me edumacate you:

Bigelow Aerospace
Lockheed CEV
The Crew Exploration Vehicle contest
Falcon V info

The long and short of it is this:

1) Bush has declared the Space Shuttle a dead duck and wants a new spaceship that's based on existing technologies instead of some pie-in-the-sky concepts.

2) The CEV is that vehicle, and will be flying by 2014. No excuses this time, they want a design that can come off the assembly line.

3) Lockheed just released their proposal to the public yesterday. Their design appears to be very similar to the Big Gemini but with some of the proven tech from the Space Shuttle and SR-71.

4) The CEV Spiral 1 is the first step to returning to the moon and eventually Mars. Spiral 2 and Spiral 3 will handle vehicles for those requirements. Nuclear engines are again being considered for Spirals 2 and 3. In response to this, Pratt and Whitney has built a Tri-Mode nuclear engine called the "TRITON".

5) The private sector has been gearing up on non-shuttle launches for the past 8 years or so. This has made the Delta II one of the most popular launch vehicles while the Shuttle finds less and less work.

6) SpaceX is poised to tremendously reduce costs through small but sensible rocket designs. They have been working on these rockets for quite a few years now. The Falcon I launches in August, and the Falcon V launches in the second quarter of 2006.

7) Bigelow took over NASA's research into inflatable space stations, and has managed to produce designs that have NASA very interested. He plans to license the technology back to NASA as well as launch his own stations on the Falcon V.

There's a lot more going on, but I don't have space to fill you in on all of it. Let's just say that your info is probably about a decade old, and that it has never been a more interesting time to be in aerospace. I highly recommend that you use Google and Wikipedia to start poking around.

I'm thinking that perhaps the Space Shuttle program was purposefully designed to leave a gaping hole in the market, and that private businesses were expected to fill that gap these last 20 years. Businesses have been slow to pick up on this opportunity, so the Air Force decided to give them a little push with this contract. Either way, this can only be a wonderful thing for space access when there are a slew of companies to choose from for your low cost earth to orbit launches.
Perhaps by 2015 we can just sub-out the whole moonbase thing, and skip that monstrosity NASA has been working on...

* LockMart CEV proposal

* Big Gemini

* X-20A Dynasoar

* Russian Kliper

Of course, reusing good ideas is a good idea, IMHO. Still, even though the sexiness of wings certainly looks nicer, I'm thinking that the capsule-based proposals by Boeing/Northrop-Grumman and t/Space will be more cost-effective and reliable. Spacecraft need wings about as much as an aircraft needs to float.

Is it just me or does this image of the model look like the Propultion Stage is being held together by duct tape? I mean, I know duct tape can achieve some unbelievable things but this might be pushing it just a bit no?

Air Foyle HeavyLift does charter that single flying AN-225 that is considered "the world's largest aircraft". (specifications)

Talk of fastest collisions brought to mind something i saw on the Dicovery channel which would surely be a contender for the fastest earthbound collision. The project in question is a 4 stage rocket sled that accelerates a 192lb instrument package into a concrete wall at mach 8.5. The video on the documentary was quite impressive showing the simulated warhead punch straight through about 5 meters of concrete.
Cool picture showing shock waves produced when you can do 0-6500mph in 6 seconds.

Talk of fastest collisions brought to mind something i saw on the Dicovery channel which would surely be a contender for the fastest earthbound collision. The project in question is a 4 stage rocket sled that accelerates a 192lb instrument package into a concrete wall at mach 8.5. The video on the documentary was quite impressive showing the simulated warhead punch straight through about 5 meters of concrete.
Cool picture showing shock waves produced when you can do 0-6500mph in 6 seconds.

• According to Fosset (the designated pilot for this mission) Dick Rutan (co-pilot of the previous circumnavigation together with Jeana Yeager, and older brother of designer Burt), they met at a party at Barron Hilton's in 1999 and Rutan told Fosset: "Steve, you could do me one better; you could do it solo."
• The plane would have to carry a ratio of 83% fuel to body weight on takeoff. Mass (and structural safety margins) where cut seriously for this, consequently the plane will only fly once with full weight (a number of test flights have been done with less weight in fuel).
• Fossett intends to fly route without sleep, but off the American West Coast would be a good place to nap (with autopilot on) to increase alertness for descent and landing. It seems that outside of takeoff and landing, the guy would not have much more to do than monitor dials and make the off adjustment.
• The Fédération Aéronatique Internationale, which governs air sports records, requires a 22,858-mile minimum for the record attempt. So a simple equatorial circumnavigation will not do the trick, and Fossett will fly a huge turn south over the Eastern Pacific to add the required miles.

The editors are probably just annoyed about this.

No link to Popular Mechanics? They've had a web presence since '96 or so. Give them some love, editors.

Historically, the law was hostile to trade secrets. If a third party not bound by contract found out a trade secret, it wasn't a secret any more. If you wanted to protect a technology, you had to get a patent, which has narrow coverage and a limited lifetime.

That's changed, due to the Uniform Trade Secrets Act and 1996 Federal legislation. But it varies from state to state. Massachusetts hasn't enacted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. Federal law is about "commercial advantage". It's not clear how this will unwind.

Compare, for example, Popular Mechanix spy photos of prototype cars.

• A marketing ploy
• A hoax

Whoa there Bubba!

I said, "Of course it would literally have to hop as wings are useless on the moon. Low gravity may make the concept practical and gas could be 'waste' from the He3 extraction."

You might also run a fusion reactor on the moon using some of the He3 you've mined and use the heat to vaporize and accelerate other byproducts of mining such as metals.

Links. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/helium3_0006 30.html, http://exosci.com/news/129.html (He3 found with concentrations of TiO2), I like the Populrar Science RAIL GUN approach to getting the stuff back to Earth. Another nice thing about proximity of TiO2 and He3 is O2 is handy for miners of the made of meat variety. Perhaps some OPossums or Coons with human like brains (search /. or google for the articles on chimera).

Gotta think outside the bathtub

I was thinking more along the lines of what ILM did on T3 (or in AI), where Arnie was covered with green prosthetics which were later replaced with digital prosthetics of the battle damage:

The Machines Of Terminator 3

It would probably be all CG for the more extreme shots like what Imageworks did on Spider-Man 2.