Might as well drape the clothes over a wire hanger if that's what they're aiming for.
That is ***exactly*** what they are aiming for. Fashion design is hard, getting your designs in a show is harder. Then gotta find a model to walk the runway to show off the dress. If all your models are skinny stick women then you don't have to deal with design variables of a more fuller figure gal. There was a time when acceptable sizes more than a 6, and dress design was more challenging considering way back designers worked with fitted gowns. You have to balance the woman's bust, waist, hips, torso length, shoulder width, and neckline. Then need to design so it complements the face and hair style. This used to be done way before Photoshop, software design, numerically controlled machines, and cheap Chinese labor. I sometimes wonder if much of this design knowledge is lost.
Of course some may say above were specifically designed just for that specific show or movie. However also back then much of this could be store bought, with a little alterations such as this from Kleins on 14th St in New York back in 1960: http://mfwright.com/CFphotogallery/connie169.jpg
Problem is for most under 30 have no idea of RF commo equipment that works on freq less than 800 MHz. Yeah I know I'm acting like a troll but from my interactions young techies are very familiar with cellphones and wifi but get this weird look on their faces when I mention UHF and VHF 2-way radios (both ham and Part 90), CB is unheard of, HF is what the old guys use.
It seems to me back in 20th century there were people in positions of power that put service above self that passed RICO, and also other laws and programs which helped the little guy. And some them little guys used some of these benefits to become big guys. Now I don't think such could ever be passed, and what does exists is being torn down or when new laws passed it helps only the big guys. Though I was thinking back then the "big guys" would shoot it out with each other (i.e. mob battles with tommy guns), and at times little guys get caught in crossfire. Nowadays the big guys "slug it out" in the courts, and the little guys indirectly either pay more for products or earn less from their work.
You can type all that out, but can't google search it so you have the answer right away?
because many times you get lotsa marketing sites that are useless. Here we get discussions of pros and cons.... though it can be a lot more information one can absorb at a single seating.
Even if a shooting war, I'd not be surprised if Chinese use "Cylon kill switches" that render all our network systems to a grinding halt. OK so I may have let my imagination run wild but with so much of computer systems in use in USA that was all designed and made in China... I don't really understand functions of each of those little black do-dads on the PC board. And all that data streaming back and forth on that multi-twisted pair cable.
"...not attacking us; there's no point." Yes, all they gotta do is continue making and selling stuff to the US. Then with all that money go and buy oil, metals, etc. Chinese can scare the Americans by launching that aircraft carrier (a post-Soviet hulk with belching smoke) or build a few airplanes that look like a stealth fighter (doesn't have to be invisible to radar, but be visible to add the scare factor). Then like what US did with SDI Star Wars program scaring Soviets to spend even more money and resources on military instead of infrastructure until they go bankrupt. Geez, all we gotta do is swap 1980s with 2010s and USSR and USA... it's the same game play!
I never can understand uproar on ITAR, etc. when we export our design and engineering overseas. Geez, foreign countries don't need spies, they just hang out on their turf and we'll send them the factory and design labs.
makes sense to me, I see comments about padding and helmets, and boxing and rugby... padding increases injuries. If playing football and not wearing padding I don't think I want to run full speed into another person head-on.
That's what I heard, and there are less injuries in rugby because players don't wear projective gear (helmet, pads) so it is more of a wrestling match instead of a "run-and-strike" match. Anyone from Europe to chime in on this? It was also mentioned (all this is what I've heard as I've done neither football or rugby) that protective gear for football players is meant to project the person running and tackling the other (or in many ways a striking blow), the protective gear does not really protect the one getting hit.
I think the other danger of football is distraction, i.e. many young boys are taught going into pro football is a excellent career choice. If you can survive preparing yourself and get selected and still survive training, then by all means become an NFL player. However, pro bowl does not have many job openings (and most cannot qualify) and youngsters will be distracted away from career choices that have wider opportunities. We hear about some former NFL players that go on to successful careers after football, we don't hear from many other former NFL players that are broke.
Should football be outlawed? No but maybe let people know risks involved. Such legislation probably cause all sorts of bad fallout. I'd like to see US reduce its fascination with football. There are a lot of OTHER SPORTS besides football!
I always think about over the air (OTA) broadcast and not have to deal with streaming video issues (throughput, routers, IP addr conflicts, bandwidth issues, data dropouts, corp shenenigans, etc.) though antennas can be a pain particularly if you are living in a condo. OTA already exists but TV stations are garbage these days, I remember in 20th century when local TV stations played movies (older movies when women dressed like women).
Re:Here we go... so what do people read now?
on
Introducing SlashBI
·
· Score: 2
I was at a pizza meeting with various Linux/software/techie/perl dev people and I mentioned about something I read on slashdot. They reacted, "What?!? People still reading slashdot?" So I asked what and where do "they" read now. I never got a straight answer, responses were mushy and only specific word I heard was reddit.
OK, so this is a chicken-and-the-egg issue but what do real/. people go to these days? Can that be answered here if they all left?
yeah right, what he proposed is a system where he pays NO tax (that 17% is on wages). Rich people get their income from other sources besides wages.
Whenever I hear or read "tax overhaul" or "reform" it always seems like another scheme for the rich to pay less and/or no taxes.
If you want to continue fighting wars, running a civilization, etc. then you gotta pay for it. I say rich should pay more taxes because they are the ones that got us into these wars. And running a civilization, well if you say why have to pay for something all these poor people get free services (use of roads, schools, etc.) then go to some of these dumpy countries where the rich pay no taxes. Of course they have to use bodyguards with machine guns to escort whenever they leave their compounds. Of course with all these tax cuts over past years seemed to result in more investment in China.
Will radio operators wear the Marconi uniform? Will this ship have passenger access to bow? (to do, "I'm King of the World!"). Will there be a Molly Brown to organize some fun parties for the snobbish people? Will the place to really have fun is down in steerage where after dinner everyone gets drunk and dance their ass off?
Be sure those idiots on the Californian maintain radio watch at all times. If you gotta hit an iceberg, hit it straight on.
Forget the ejection seat. I bet the reason they used a 727 is that it's fitted with an Airstair, a combined hatch/stairway at the very rear of the aircraft. The Airstair makes the 727 one of the few airliners that it's possible to parachute from without the risk of being hit by the engines, wing or tailplane - a person known as "Mr Cooper" proved this was possible in 1971.
I done a few jumps from a 727 during World FreeFall Convention in 1990s, Quincy, IL. They brought in a 727, a cargo plane, for one of the jumpships at the convention. Removed the airstair door, lined the wall, ceiling, stairs with plywood to avoid having skydivers snag on something on the way out. As it is a cargo, no seats, they loaded the aircraft with 200 skydivers, and it took forever,very hot and humid (IL in August) and sitting our butts waiting for last to load (hint, don't be the first in line). Aircraft climb rate was fast, when passing through 7K or so the whole inside fogged up (you all into humidity condensation, dew pt, etc). One jump run, flaps down and aircraft slows to 155mph, first 100 goes out single file. then they go around for second jump run and last 100 go out.
As slowly running in a single file towards door, every 5th jumper had a camera on their helmet, then down that "chute." Hitting the air at 155 mph was not "painful" but there is immediate "flow control" unlike most jumpship exits are around 90 mph so it takes a little time to build up to full freefall aero control. Obviously do a quick turnaround to look back at the plane. However, the spot was terrible, jumpers were spread out for miles but local folks always happy to give jumpers ride back to airport.
The plane arrived day early and they figure to do a "test" of 50 people. I already had a jump ticket for next day and scheduled a videoguy. I was tempted to get on this first run but if I had a reserve ride then that would put me out the next day. However, this jump run was at 200 mph. There was a mixup on jumprun. Intention was jumpers all up, then flaps down/slowdown, and followed by all out. they missed the second step. It turns out that extra 45 mph can be painful, a number of jumpers had muscles pulled when they hit that airstream. Nobody was seriously hurt but a few were limping around and didn't jump for a few days.
Convention organizers said they had to do all kinds of paperwork with FAA. However, a key thing that made it possible to do jumps is Boeing did some airdrops while flight testing 727 in the 1960s. Organizers found a copy of that report to show actual tests indicate can safely drop something out of the airplane. Note that "Dan Cooper" was first to skydive from 727, then hijacker Richard McCoy was next to jump from 727 (some think he was DB Cooper). Later in the 1981 movie Pursuit of DB Cooper by two jumpers, Carl Boenish flying camera and (who?) skydiver as DB Cooper going out the plane. Then 11 years later the skydivers at Quincy in 1992.
I gotta get my VHS tapes and post some vids. I acquired a black suit with a thin black tie and dark sunglasses to "do the scene" (however, I had no $200K) but this was in 20th century when you can make jokes about skyjackings. Next year did the same, and I met Bernie Rhodes who wrote the book, "D.B. Cooper: The Real McCoy." He was first startled when he saw me in my DB Cooper outfit.
I don't follow much of the esoteric details (and don't give a yayhoo about speed) but when I enter a term in a search engine, i.e. "RF video combiners," I'd like some return of technical documents and (what would be really nice) individual techies with their own webpage showing how to implement and what pitfalls to avoid. Instead I get a bunch of sales/marketing aggregates, tech discussions that are really disguised sales/marketing crap, ebay listings, go-get-bids, sorority-sluts, etc.
OK, so any big company gotta have lawyers to deal with business issues but geez, I remember back in 20th century when Motorola made components (transistors, ICs), TV sets ("works in a drawer" I remember seeing the commercial then going to a friend's house to pull it out and see inside), and the best two-way radios. They were really ***expensive*** but damn them Mocom-70s can easily last 30 years, couldn't be narrowbanded but take the trunkmount units and be used as armor plating. And the HT-200s can chock a runaway railroad car or withstand a nuclear blast at 50 yards (OK so I made up the last two). Nowadays, I only hear about the Big/\/\ when they're suing someone or offshoring one of their enterprises.
Retrieval of Asteroidal Materials [1979] http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790024063_1979024063.pdf
BRIAN O'LEARY, MICHAEL 1. GAFFEY, DAVID 1. ROSS, and ROBERT SALKELD
Earlier scenarios for mass-driver retrieval of asteroidal materials have been tested and refined after new data were considered on mass-driver performance, favorable delta-V opportunities to Earth-approaching asteroids with gravity assists, designs for mining equipment, opportunities for processing volatiles and free metals at the asteroid, mission scenarios, and parametric studies of the most significant variables. We conclude that the asteroid-retrieval option is competitive with the retrieval of lunar materials for space manufacturing, while a carbonaceous object would provide a distinctive advantage over the Earth as a source of consumables and raw materials for biomass in space settlements during the 1990's. We recommend immediate studies on asteroid-retrieval mission opportunities, an increased search and followup program, precursor missions, trade-offs with the Moon and Earth as sources of materials, and supporting technology.
There was a time when wealthy private people had most advanced aerospace development, i.e. fastest airplanes and highest flying such as James Dolittle, Wiley Post, Howard Hughes (well some of these guys may have got a boost from govt). After WWII it was the govt as Scott Crossfield said of aircraft inventory at Edwards, "Not even Howard Hughes has what we have." Fast forward to 21th century while NASA struggles with SLS, these stinking rich are forging ahead on grander plans. Question is which will become reality and at what price (no, not $$$ but of results and resources).
in 1970s a conference at NASA Ames Research Center on Space Resources and Space Settlements. Attendees included Jacques Cousteau and Gov. Jerry Brown, Gerald O'neill was well known even in public media discussing space settlements (govt like NASA said "settlements" where private groups said "colonies" and reason is colonies was a bad term to use particularly for African nations that were colonized by Europeons). Actually I thought, and still do, think the concept of putting an asteroid in earth orbit, setting up mining ops (imagine one that has lotsa platinum, you will find lowcost HLV will get put into service ***now***). Or an asteroid used as a HEO space station, burrow deep inside and have considerable shielding.
Earlier scenarios for mass-driver retrieval of asteroidal materials were tested and refined after new data were considered on mass-driver performance, favorable delta-V opportunities to earth-approaching asteroids with gravity assists, designs for mining equipment, opportunities for processing volatiles and free metals at the asteroid, mission scenarios, and parametric studies of the most significant variables. It is concluded that the asteroid-retrieval option is competitive with the retrieval of lunar materials for space manufacturing, while a carbonaceous object would provide a distinctive advantage over the earth as a source of consumables and raw materials for biomass in space settlements during the 1990's. Immediate studies on asteroid-retrieval mission opportunities, an increased search and followup program, precursor missions, trade-offs with the moon and earth as sources of materials, and supporting technology are recommended.
Alrighty, so this is not a spaceship or a research aircraft but they built a new building and used this as opportunity to try new architecture and new technologies in buildings. Maybe some of this innovative, maybe some is simply a waste. However, sometimes it has to be done in the real world and not computer simulation. NASA is the perfect agency to try some of this as their mission is technology development without having to show a profit. Someone has to do it, and NASA can take these kinds of risks commercial companies will never do. That's what govt R&D is suppose to do. Now some of you may argue otherwise, and if so then the argument is NASA should do more (like N.A.C.A.). Some of this stuff can be done by commercial companies (incidently, specific work was done by a commercial firm) but companies have to show ROI and they will never take chances on doing a lot of new stuff that may be a big money loser. Love or loth the Sustainability Base building, many things will be learned on what to do, and what not to do, in new building design that commercial firms can learn from NASA's exercise.
I wonder if this new building really is a new building, or is it an "extension?"
Some snips from Wayne Hale, former Space Shuttle program manager http://waynehale.wordpress.com/
Construction of Facilities, February 26, 2012
A long standing federal law states that any new buildings must be approved by the Congress; any new building must be its own separate line item in the Federal Budget. This is to make sure that the legislators know exactly what is being built on Federal property; to ensure that money is properly spent and not wasted....officers and enlisted, who served at Fort Laramie in the late 19th century.
Every year the post commander would propose building 4 or 5 new officer’s houses, and every year Congress would strike those line items from the Federal budget. No new houses. Until one year, he had a really ingenious idea. He proposed that since the army was often in the field pursuing the “hostiles” that the government should construct four “field kitchens” to feed the men. Then, the commandant used the maintenance budget and the free labor of the troops during the winter months to build “extensions” on those “field kitchens”.
True in the 1880’s, true in the 1990’s, and still true today; it is no so much following the rules as it is finding a way to get what needs to be done in spite of the rules.
In fact, in Federal installations all around the country, I have encountered “additions” that were bigger than the original building. Makes you wonder about the effectiveness of a rule that was probably written in the 18th century.
So my advice to anybody trying to get things done in the byzantine maze of Federal regulations is to get creative. There is almost always a way to accomplish the mission in spite of the obstacles. Sometimes it pays to study history because other clever people have gotten their mission accomplished by perfectly legal and legitimate ways to work through the regs.
By this time, you've probably figured out what the ruckas was all about
No not following you here......
1972 Olympics suffered a terrorist attack, it was pretty horrible. I cannot imagine how bad LVSlushdat must have felt after having opportunity to attend the games.
Slashdot Mirror
Might as well drape the clothes over a wire hanger if that's what they're aiming for.
That is ***exactly*** what they are aiming for. Fashion design is hard, getting your designs in a show is harder. Then gotta find a model to walk the runway to show off the dress. If all your models are skinny stick women then you don't have to deal with design variables of a more fuller figure gal. There was a time when acceptable sizes more than a 6, and dress design was more challenging considering way back designers worked with fitted gowns. You have to balance the woman's bust, waist, hips, torso length, shoulder width, and neckline. Then need to design so it complements the face and hair style. This used to be done way before Photoshop, software design, numerically controlled machines, and cheap Chinese labor. I sometimes wonder if much of this design knowledge is lost.
http://mfwright.com/CFphotogallery/connie104.jpg
http://mfwright.com/CFphotogallery/connie5.jpg
http://www.geocities.ws/lollophotos/gina74.html
http://www.geocities.ws/lollophotos/gina123.html
Of course some may say above were specifically designed just for that specific show or movie. However also back then much of this could be store bought, with a little alterations such as this from Kleins on 14th St in New York back in 1960: http://mfwright.com/CFphotogallery/connie169.jpg
Problem is for most under 30 have no idea of RF commo equipment that works on freq less than 800 MHz. Yeah I know I'm acting like a troll but from my interactions young techies are very familiar with cellphones and wifi but get this weird look on their faces when I mention UHF and VHF 2-way radios (both ham and Part 90), CB is unheard of, HF is what the old guys use.
It seems to me back in 20th century there were people in positions of power that put service above self that passed RICO, and also other laws and programs which helped the little guy. And some them little guys used some of these benefits to become big guys. Now I don't think such could ever be passed, and what does exists is being torn down or when new laws passed it helps only the big guys. Though I was thinking back then the "big guys" would shoot it out with each other (i.e. mob battles with tommy guns), and at times little guys get caught in crossfire. Nowadays the big guys "slug it out" in the courts, and the little guys indirectly either pay more for products or earn less from their work.
You can type all that out, but can't google search it so you have the answer right away?
because many times you get lotsa marketing sites that are useless. Here we get discussions of pros and cons.... though it can be a lot more information one can absorb at a single seating.
Even if a shooting war, I'd not be surprised if Chinese use "Cylon kill switches" that render all our network systems to a grinding halt. OK so I may have let my imagination run wild but with so much of computer systems in use in USA that was all designed and made in China... I don't really understand functions of each of those little black do-dads on the PC board. And all that data streaming back and forth on that multi-twisted pair cable.
"...not attacking us; there's no point." Yes, all they gotta do is continue making and selling stuff to the US. Then with all that money go and buy oil, metals, etc. Chinese can scare the Americans by launching that aircraft carrier (a post-Soviet hulk with belching smoke) or build a few airplanes that look like a stealth fighter (doesn't have to be invisible to radar, but be visible to add the scare factor). Then like what US did with SDI Star Wars program scaring Soviets to spend even more money and resources on military instead of infrastructure until they go bankrupt. Geez, all we gotta do is swap 1980s with 2010s and USSR and USA... it's the same game play!
Thanks to all that answered/clarified my rugby questions!
I never can understand uproar on ITAR, etc. when we export our design and engineering overseas. Geez, foreign countries don't need spies, they just hang out on their turf and we'll send them the factory and design labs.
makes sense to me, I see comments about padding and helmets, and boxing and rugby... padding increases injuries. If playing football and not wearing padding I don't think I want to run full speed into another person head-on.
That's what I heard, and there are less injuries in rugby because players don't wear projective gear (helmet, pads) so it is more of a wrestling match instead of a "run-and-strike" match. Anyone from Europe to chime in on this? It was also mentioned (all this is what I've heard as I've done neither football or rugby) that protective gear for football players is meant to project the person running and tackling the other (or in many ways a striking blow), the protective gear does not really protect the one getting hit.
I think the other danger of football is distraction, i.e. many young boys are taught going into pro football is a excellent career choice. If you can survive preparing yourself and get selected and still survive training, then by all means become an NFL player. However, pro bowl does not have many job openings (and most cannot qualify) and youngsters will be distracted away from career choices that have wider opportunities. We hear about some former NFL players that go on to successful careers after football, we don't hear from many other former NFL players that are broke.
Should football be outlawed? No but maybe let people know risks involved. Such legislation probably cause all sorts of bad fallout. I'd like to see US reduce its fascination with football. There are a lot of OTHER SPORTS besides football!
I always think about over the air (OTA) broadcast and not have to deal with streaming video issues (throughput, routers, IP addr conflicts, bandwidth issues, data dropouts, corp shenenigans, etc.) though antennas can be a pain particularly if you are living in a condo. OTA already exists but TV stations are garbage these days, I remember in 20th century when local TV stations played movies (older movies when women dressed like women).
I was at a pizza meeting with various Linux/software/techie/perl dev people and I mentioned about something I read on slashdot. They reacted, "What?!? People still reading slashdot?" So I asked what and where do "they" read now. I never got a straight answer, responses were mushy and only specific word I heard was reddit.
OK, so this is a chicken-and-the-egg issue but what do real /. people go to these days? Can that be answered here if they all left?
>Steve Forbes proposed back in 1996.
yeah right, what he proposed is a system where he pays NO tax (that 17% is on wages). Rich people get their income from other sources besides wages.
Whenever I hear or read "tax overhaul" or "reform" it always seems like another scheme for the rich to pay less and/or no taxes.
If you want to continue fighting wars, running a civilization, etc. then you gotta pay for it. I say rich should pay more taxes because they are the ones that got us into these wars. And running a civilization, well if you say why have to pay for something all these poor people get free services (use of roads, schools, etc.) then go to some of these dumpy countries where the rich pay no taxes. Of course they have to use bodyguards with machine guns to escort whenever they leave their compounds. Of course with all these tax cuts over past years seemed to result in more investment in China.
Will radio operators wear the Marconi uniform? Will this ship have passenger access to bow? (to do, "I'm King of the World!"). Will there be a Molly Brown to organize some fun parties for the snobbish people? Will the place to really have fun is down in steerage where after dinner everyone gets drunk and dance their ass off?
Be sure those idiots on the Californian maintain radio watch at all times. If you gotta hit an iceberg, hit it straight on.
Is it just me or do others see virtually all articles are submitted by samzenpus?
Forget the ejection seat. I bet the reason they used a 727 is that it's fitted with an Airstair, a combined hatch/stairway at the very rear of the aircraft. The Airstair makes the 727 one of the few airliners that it's possible to parachute from without the risk of being hit by the engines, wing or tailplane - a person known as "Mr Cooper" proved this was possible in 1971.
I done a few jumps from a 727 during World FreeFall Convention in 1990s, Quincy, IL. They brought in a 727, a cargo plane, for one of the jumpships at the convention. Removed the airstair door, lined the wall, ceiling, stairs with plywood to avoid having skydivers snag on something on the way out. As it is a cargo, no seats, they loaded the aircraft with 200 skydivers, and it took forever,very hot and humid (IL in August) and sitting our butts waiting for last to load (hint, don't be the first in line). Aircraft climb rate was fast, when passing through 7K or so the whole inside fogged up (you all into humidity condensation, dew pt, etc). One jump run, flaps down and aircraft slows to 155mph, first 100 goes out single file. then they go around for second jump run and last 100 go out.
As slowly running in a single file towards door, every 5th jumper had a camera on their helmet, then down that "chute." Hitting the air at 155 mph was not "painful" but there is immediate "flow control" unlike most jumpship exits are around 90 mph so it takes a little time to build up to full freefall aero control. Obviously do a quick turnaround to look back at the plane. However, the spot was terrible, jumpers were spread out for miles but local folks always happy to give jumpers ride back to airport.
The plane arrived day early and they figure to do a "test" of 50 people. I already had a jump ticket for next day and scheduled a videoguy. I was tempted to get on this first run but if I had a reserve ride then that would put me out the next day. However, this jump run was at 200 mph. There was a mixup on jumprun. Intention was jumpers all up, then flaps down/slowdown, and followed by all out. they missed the second step. It turns out that extra 45 mph can be painful, a number of jumpers had muscles pulled when they hit that airstream. Nobody was seriously hurt but a few were limping around and didn't jump for a few days.
Convention organizers said they had to do all kinds of paperwork with FAA. However, a key thing that made it possible to do jumps is Boeing did some airdrops while flight testing 727 in the 1960s. Organizers found a copy of that report to show actual tests indicate can safely drop something out of the airplane. Note that "Dan Cooper" was first to skydive from 727, then hijacker Richard McCoy was next to jump from 727 (some think he was DB Cooper). Later in the 1981 movie Pursuit of DB Cooper by two jumpers, Carl Boenish flying camera and (who?) skydiver as DB Cooper going out the plane. Then 11 years later the skydivers at Quincy in 1992.
I gotta get my VHS tapes and post some vids. I acquired a black suit with a thin black tie and dark sunglasses to "do the scene" (however, I had no $200K) but this was in 20th century when you can make jokes about skyjackings. Next year did the same, and I met Bernie Rhodes who wrote the book, "D.B. Cooper: The Real McCoy." He was first startled when he saw me in my DB Cooper outfit.
I don't follow much of the esoteric details (and don't give a yayhoo about speed) but when I enter a term in a search engine, i.e. "RF video combiners," I'd like some return of technical documents and (what would be really nice) individual techies with their own webpage showing how to implement and what pitfalls to avoid. Instead I get a bunch of sales/marketing aggregates, tech discussions that are really disguised sales/marketing crap, ebay listings, go-get-bids, sorority-sluts, etc.
OK, so any big company gotta have lawyers to deal with business issues but geez, I remember back in 20th century when Motorola made components (transistors, ICs), TV sets ("works in a drawer" I remember seeing the commercial then going to a friend's house to pull it out and see inside), and the best two-way radios. They were really ***expensive*** but damn them Mocom-70s can easily last 30 years, couldn't be narrowbanded but take the trunkmount units and be used as armor plating. And the HT-200s can chock a runaway railroad car or withstand a nuclear blast at 50 yards (OK so I made up the last two). Nowadays, I only hear about the Big /\/\ when they're suing someone or offshoring one of their enterprises.
They might send up the Space Cops.
no, it is the Space Patrol http://www.solarguard.com/sphome.htm
Retrieval of Asteroidal Materials [1979]
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790024063_1979024063.pdf
BRIAN O'LEARY, MICHAEL 1. GAFFEY, DAVID 1. ROSS, and ROBERT SALKELD
Earlier scenarios for mass-driver retrieval of asteroidal materials have been tested and refined after new data were considered on mass-driver performance, favorable delta-V opportunities to Earth-approaching asteroids with gravity assists, designs for mining equipment, opportunities for processing volatiles and free metals at the asteroid, mission scenarios, and parametric studies of the most significant variables. We conclude that the asteroid-retrieval option is competitive with the retrieval of lunar materials for space manufacturing, while a carbonaceous object would provide a distinctive advantage over the Earth as a source of consumables and raw materials for biomass in space settlements during the 1990's. We recommend immediate studies on asteroid-retrieval mission opportunities, an increased search and followup program, precursor missions, trade-offs with the Moon and Earth as sources of materials, and supporting technology.
insignia for this program? http://www.flickr.com/photos/45676693@N03/6959137824/in/set-72157629163524738/
There was a time when wealthy private people had most advanced aerospace development, i.e. fastest airplanes and highest flying such as James Dolittle, Wiley Post, Howard Hughes (well some of these guys may have got a boost from govt). After WWII it was the govt as Scott Crossfield said of aircraft inventory at Edwards, "Not even Howard Hughes has what we have." Fast forward to 21th century while NASA struggles with SLS, these stinking rich are forging ahead on grander plans. Question is which will become reality and at what price (no, not $$$ but of results and resources).
in 1970s a conference at NASA Ames Research Center on Space Resources and Space Settlements. Attendees included Jacques Cousteau and Gov. Jerry Brown, Gerald O'neill was well known even in public media discussing space settlements (govt like NASA said "settlements" where private groups said "colonies" and reason is colonies was a bad term to use particularly for African nations that were colonized by Europeons). Actually I thought, and still do, think the concept of putting an asteroid in earth orbit, setting up mining ops (imagine one that has lotsa platinum, you will find lowcost HLV will get put into service ***now***). Or an asteroid used as a HEO space station, burrow deep inside and have considerable shielding.
from http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19790024063&hterms=1979+asteroid+retrieval&qs=Ntx%3Dmode%2520matchallpartial%2520%26Ntk%3DAll%26N%3D0%26Ntt%3D1979%2520%2522asteroid%2520retrieval%2522
Earlier scenarios for mass-driver retrieval of asteroidal materials were tested and refined after new data were considered on mass-driver performance, favorable delta-V opportunities to earth-approaching asteroids with gravity assists, designs for mining equipment, opportunities for processing volatiles and free metals at the asteroid, mission scenarios, and parametric studies of the most significant variables. It is concluded that the asteroid-retrieval option is competitive with the retrieval of lunar materials for space manufacturing, while a carbonaceous object would provide a distinctive advantage over the earth as a source of consumables and raw materials for biomass in space settlements during the 1990's. Immediate studies on asteroid-retrieval mission opportunities, an increased search and followup program, precursor missions, trade-offs with the moon and earth as sources of materials, and supporting technology are recommended.
PDF of report, http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790024063_1979024063.pdf
Alrighty, so this is not a spaceship or a research aircraft but they built a new building and used this as opportunity to try new architecture and new technologies in buildings. Maybe some of this innovative, maybe some is simply a waste. However, sometimes it has to be done in the real world and not computer simulation. NASA is the perfect agency to try some of this as their mission is technology development without having to show a profit. Someone has to do it, and NASA can take these kinds of risks commercial companies will never do. That's what govt R&D is suppose to do. Now some of you may argue otherwise, and if so then the argument is NASA should do more (like N.A.C.A.). Some of this stuff can be done by commercial companies (incidently, specific work was done by a commercial firm) but companies have to show ROI and they will never take chances on doing a lot of new stuff that may be a big money loser. Love or loth the Sustainability Base building, many things will be learned on what to do, and what not to do, in new building design that commercial firms can learn from NASA's exercise.
Space is half of NASA's mission. Darned aeronautics, always the bridesmaid but never the bride (quote from an AC on /.).
I wonder if this new building really is a new building, or is it an "extension?"
Some snips from Wayne Hale, former Space Shuttle program manager
http://waynehale.wordpress.com/
Construction of Facilities, February 26, 2012
A long standing federal law states that any new buildings must be approved by the Congress; any new building must be its own separate line item in the Federal Budget. This is to make sure that the legislators know exactly what is being built on Federal property; to ensure that money is properly spent and not wasted. ...officers and enlisted, who served at Fort Laramie in the late 19th century.
Every year the post commander would propose building 4 or 5 new officer’s houses, and every year Congress would strike those line items from the Federal budget. No new houses. Until one year, he had a really ingenious idea. He proposed that since the army was often in the field pursuing the “hostiles” that the government should construct four “field kitchens” to feed the men. Then, the commandant used the maintenance budget and the free labor of the troops during the winter months to build “extensions” on those “field kitchens”.
True in the 1880’s, true in the 1990’s, and still true today; it is no so much following the rules as it is finding a way to get what needs to be done in spite of the rules.
In fact, in Federal installations all around the country, I have encountered “additions” that were bigger than the original building. Makes you wonder about the effectiveness of a rule that was probably written in the 18th century.
So my advice to anybody trying to get things done in the byzantine maze of Federal regulations is to get creative. There is almost always a way to accomplish the mission in spite of the obstacles. Sometimes it pays to study history because other clever people have gotten their mission accomplished by perfectly legal and legitimate ways to work through the regs.
for more see, http://waynehale.wordpress.com/ Construction of Facilities, February 26, 2012
By this time, you've probably figured out what the ruckas was all about
No not following you here......
1972 Olympics suffered a terrorist attack, it was pretty horrible. I cannot imagine how bad LVSlushdat must have felt after having opportunity to attend the games.