Boeing was working on the Mach 0.98 Sonic Cruiser, but the airlines shot it down, desiring lower operating costs instead of more speed. I doubt an SST is anywhere in the near future.
But at least a lot of tech for that went into the 787. So instead of getting more speed, we got the same speed but much more efficiency.
How big of a screw-up not keeping your software versions consistent can cause? That was a world record.
But from memory, I know the revamped the cabin and avionics, but then everybody's been doing that for new aircraft versions. Generally I see things that Boeing was working on too, but the A380 beat due to Boeing's delays with the composites.
So got a list of really significant stuff in the A380 other than the size and record amount of cabling?
I'd like to do a "borderline psychotic" rant based on your vices, or those you approve of.
No, I do not smoke.
They should be banned from having health insurance or receiving any public medical benefits.
Good idea. Let's ban some more:
Obese: Higher instance of heart disease and diabetes Alcohol drinker: Higher instance of liver disease Homosexual: Higher instance of AIDS Athlete: Higher instance of muscle, bone and joint injury Old: Higher instance of everything
About the only important place the A380 uses composites is in the wing box, and it's about 20% by weight overall. The rest is just bits here and there to save weight, a chunk of fuselage here, a chunk of wing there.
The 787 uses composites almost everywhere, and depends on them for complete structural integrity. , Composites in a 787 are 50% by weight, 80% by volume, so you look at a 787, only about 1/5 of what you see is metal.
The situation is understandable, since when Boeing started talking about making a mostly composite plane, Airbus was pretty much dismissing the idea. At the time they'd only gone as far with serious use as the vertical stabiliser and rudder and the A330.
This was a huge risk by Boeing that delayed the project several times. I'm glad to see it finally coming through.
Both the 787 and A380 pressurize to 6,000 feet instead of the usual 8,000 feet. But the cool part is that the 787 doesn't bleed hot air from the engines as is normal. It uses a variable speed electrically driven compressor with a humidifier, heater and filters.
The 787 also has bigger windows.
The A380 really didn't introduce much new in technology, mainly built what we had bigger. The 787 is pretty radical.
You have a problem with assimilation? You're a Reconquista, right?
You think this former immigrant is anti-immigrant?Yes, I lived in a foreign country for a long time, I bothered to learn the language, I bothered to abide by the customs. I didn't complain when none of the official forms for regular internal stuff were in English. I didn't complain that stores and ads didn't have English versions. I realized I was in their country and had a duty to assimilate while there. And when I brought my wife back here, she assimilated to the US, doesn't even have a detectable foreign accent.
The oh-so enlightened Switzerland will even kick you out if you haven't learned German or French well enough after a few years. Good idea.
If you're doing it because you don't like Hispanics who are CLEARLY illegal immigrants because their first language isn't English, rights violation, or at least discrimination
That's not the reason they're doing it, and I haven't seen this related to the subject of illegal immigrants (I doubt many teachers are illegals).
PS French isn't my first language, yet the French people I know seem to really appreciate my effort to speak their language, in spite of an American accent.
Suggest you teach their kids in a French school with that accent, or get an appointment to L'Academie Francaise. You will see a different attitude.
It would be interesting to know whether there is a correlation between people who failed the accent test and people who are visible minorities.
By far, the largest immigrant population in Arizona is Latinos; thus, those who fail the test would logically be mostly Latino. That doesn't mean racist, that means they're immigrants who have too thick an accent.
People need to stop the racism claims until they can show unintelligible white German, Russian or even Scottish speakers who are not likewise told to to work on their accents.
then it surely must violate the civil liberties of any U.S. citizen to travel freely and work anywhere within the United States
It has absolutely nothing to do with travel, It has something to do with work only insofar as a person being qualified for said work. A reasonable qualification (e.g., students being able to understand you) should raise no civil rights issues.
First let me say I do appreciate you and the effort towards assmiliation. I spent years in a foreign country and I never expected the host to bend to my needs. Need to complete a form from city hall? Too bad, it's not available in English, better learn the language.
But what you want is not what these people want. It's the "Reconquista," the taking over of America by Latinos. They want the kids to grow up with the accents, they want the accents to become the norm, they want to turn the Southwest into little Mexico.
They already believe every American should learn Spanish, and look down on you if you don't know it. I was castigated for not knowing Spanish, "Why aren't you bilingual?" I answered I am, I speak English and German (left out the French since I'm really rusty). The look I got was like that didn't even count.
Now when they start speaking Spanish to me, I start speaking German to them. Really freaks them out. Then I suggest in English that we try a language we commonly know -- English.
People forget that. We all discriminate. Clean water, dirty water; red meat, moldy meat; competent doctor, incompetent doctor. Beyond that it's tastes: music, food, looks, cars, computers.
At a basic level discrimination protects us by attempting to avoid things that are bad for us. Socially, varied discrimination gives us a much wider variety. It would be downright boring if we all liked and disliked the same things.
Yes, they are discriminating. They want teachers who their students can easily understand, thus facilitating the students' education. Teachers who do not fit that description should be discriminated against, just as I discriminate against moldy meat.
To send every teacher to a class would be a waste of resources and achieve nothing concrete but pissing off those fluent teachers forced to sit through the class.
Then I suggest not immigrating to a country where you are incapable of speaking the language understandably.
But that's not the case here. Native Spanish speakers can learn English without advanced training if they want to. I'm betting her problem is more about wanting to push her Hispanic identity over American (very common). These people want the host country to bend for them, and I find that insulting to the host country. They have a duty to assimilate.
I knew a Hispanic girl, fom Spain, working among Americans. It took me a while to catch the barest hint of an accent. She learned English in regular school and while living with Americans. Same with Germans in the US, some pretty thick, some it takes a minute to catch it, some have no German accent at all.
But when I tell someone I can't understand, they usually switch to understandable high-German without missing a beat. They could just speak high-German all the time, but they get lazy, or they just prefer their localized accent for everyday speech.
If it has anything to do with regulating immigration or immigrants, it's automatically considered to be a violation of rights.
Well, that is if it's seen to affect Latino immigrants. They wouldn't give a damn about a school district telling a German immigrant with a heavy accent to change his speech so that the students can understand him.
The Tea Party movement exists independent of the Republicans. Sure, many incumbent Republicans have done their best to attach themselves to the Tea Party's popularity, and the party in general has tried to portray itself as aligning. The faithful do seem to be buying it.
People tend to think the Tea Party is targeted only at Democrats. Not quite so. The Tea Party knocked out a lot of Republican incumbents and party favorites in the primaries in 2010. If it keeps going like this, the Republican Party may actually turn into a party with something to distinguish itself from the Democratic Party. But, no, I don't have much hope, since the co-opting above seems to be working.
Simple statement: If there is going to be a war -- which there is -- I prefer that fewer of our people die than theirs. Quite rational.
You conveniently leave off the next sentence, "As to whether the war was a good idea from the beginning, that's a different issue and quite debatable."
Those who have undergone successful government indoctrination do not question the validity of their leaders' wars.
However, those who have undergone successful liberal indoctrination do unerringly question the validity of any military action, although there are exceptions for when the liberals are in power.
I'll just say that the only folks who would really want a nation of criminals (and creating criminals if they aren't already there) would be those who take pleasure in locking people up and/or inflicting pain on people, in other words, sadists.
It's not about sadism. It's about power, and those at the top are quite often the ones who want that power. As you say, the rest of us are perfectly happy that people just don't hurt each other, but we're not the ones in power, we're not the ones making the rules.
Now pardon me while I go have a smoke, making sure to light up at 20' away from this privately-owned business where everybody smokes. But not 19' away, because that's illegal.
Germany, for example. University is free, but only the good students get in, the ones who are more likely to make a degree worth it. Everybody else goes vocational school, which can actually be quite good and technical and set you up with a good-paying trade.
Free here would mean every idiot going, wasting our resources. As it is a LOT of students aren't prepared for college when they get there, so they simply shouldn't be there. A guy I knew was studying number lines! Yes, number lines, in college math. I learned that in, what, fourth grade?
His college had MATH 100 (the number lines course), 101 and 107, and none of the content of any of them was beyond my high school's non-AP math courses.
Slashdot Mirror
What brush fires are going to be started by a smoker putting his butts out in an ashtray in a bar?
But drunk drivers kill over 10,000 people a year.
Boeing was working on the Mach 0.98 Sonic Cruiser, but the airlines shot it down, desiring lower operating costs instead of more speed. I doubt an SST is anywhere in the near future.
But at least a lot of tech for that went into the 787. So instead of getting more speed, we got the same speed but much more efficiency.
How big of a screw-up not keeping your software versions consistent can cause? That was a world record.
But from memory, I know the revamped the cabin and avionics, but then everybody's been doing that for new aircraft versions. Generally I see things that Boeing was working on too, but the A380 beat due to Boeing's delays with the composites.
So got a list of really significant stuff in the A380 other than the size and record amount of cabling?
I'd like to do a "borderline psychotic" rant based on your vices, or those you approve of.
No, I do not smoke.
About the only important place the A380 uses composites is in the wing box, and it's about 20% by weight overall. The rest is just bits here and there to save weight, a chunk of fuselage here, a chunk of wing there.
The 787 uses composites almost everywhere, and depends on them for complete structural integrity. , Composites in a 787 are 50% by weight, 80% by volume, so you look at a 787, only about 1/5 of what you see is metal.
The situation is understandable, since when Boeing started talking about making a mostly composite plane, Airbus was pretty much dismissing the idea. At the time they'd only gone as far with serious use as the vertical stabiliser and rudder and the A330.
This was a huge risk by Boeing that delayed the project several times. I'm glad to see it finally coming through.
Both the 787 and A380 pressurize to 6,000 feet instead of the usual 8,000 feet. But the cool part is that the 787 doesn't bleed hot air from the engines as is normal. It uses a variable speed electrically driven compressor with a humidifier, heater and filters.
The 787 also has bigger windows.
The A380 really didn't introduce much new in technology, mainly built what we had bigger. The 787 is pretty radical.
You have a problem with assimilation? You're a Reconquista, right?
You think this former immigrant is anti-immigrant?Yes, I lived in a foreign country for a long time, I bothered to learn the language, I bothered to abide by the customs. I didn't complain when none of the official forms for regular internal stuff were in English. I didn't complain that stores and ads didn't have English versions. I realized I was in their country and had a duty to assimilate while there. And when I brought my wife back here, she assimilated to the US, doesn't even have a detectable foreign accent.
The oh-so enlightened Switzerland will even kick you out if you haven't learned German or French well enough after a few years. Good idea.
How do you pronounce that?
That's not the reason they're doing it, and I haven't seen this related to the subject of illegal immigrants (I doubt many teachers are illegals).
Suggest you teach their kids in a French school with that accent, or get an appointment to L'Academie Francaise. You will see a different attitude.
By far, the largest immigrant population in Arizona is Latinos; thus, those who fail the test would logically be mostly Latino. That doesn't mean racist, that means they're immigrants who have too thick an accent.
People need to stop the racism claims until they can show unintelligible white German, Russian or even Scottish speakers who are not likewise told to to work on their accents.
It has absolutely nothing to do with travel, It has something to do with work only insofar as a person being qualified for said work. A reasonable qualification (e.g., students being able to understand you) should raise no civil rights issues.
First let me say I do appreciate you and the effort towards assmiliation. I spent years in a foreign country and I never expected the host to bend to my needs. Need to complete a form from city hall? Too bad, it's not available in English, better learn the language.
But what you want is not what these people want. It's the "Reconquista," the taking over of America by Latinos. They want the kids to grow up with the accents, they want the accents to become the norm, they want to turn the Southwest into little Mexico.
They already believe every American should learn Spanish, and look down on you if you don't know it. I was castigated for not knowing Spanish, "Why aren't you bilingual?" I answered I am, I speak English and German (left out the French since I'm really rusty). The look I got was like that didn't even count.
Now when they start speaking Spanish to me, I start speaking German to them. Really freaks them out. Then I suggest in English that we try a language we commonly know -- English.
People forget that. We all discriminate. Clean water, dirty water; red meat, moldy meat; competent doctor, incompetent doctor. Beyond that it's tastes: music, food, looks, cars, computers.
At a basic level discrimination protects us by attempting to avoid things that are bad for us. Socially, varied discrimination gives us a much wider variety. It would be downright boring if we all liked and disliked the same things.
Yes, they are discriminating. They want teachers who their students can easily understand, thus facilitating the students' education. Teachers who do not fit that description should be discriminated against, just as I discriminate against moldy meat.
To send every teacher to a class would be a waste of resources and achieve nothing concrete but pissing off those fluent teachers forced to sit through the class.
Then I suggest not immigrating to a country where you are incapable of speaking the language understandably.
But that's not the case here. Native Spanish speakers can learn English without advanced training if they want to. I'm betting her problem is more about wanting to push her Hispanic identity over American (very common). These people want the host country to bend for them, and I find that insulting to the host country. They have a duty to assimilate.
I knew a Hispanic girl, fom Spain, working among Americans. It took me a while to catch the barest hint of an accent. She learned English in regular school and while living with Americans. Same with Germans in the US, some pretty thick, some it takes a minute to catch it, some have no German accent at all.
Badish, Bavarian, very difficult.
But when I tell someone I can't understand, they usually switch to understandable high-German without missing a beat. They could just speak high-German all the time, but they get lazy, or they just prefer their localized accent for everyday speech.
If it has anything to do with regulating immigration or immigrants, it's automatically considered to be a violation of rights.
Well, that is if it's seen to affect Latino immigrants. They wouldn't give a damn about a school district telling a German immigrant with a heavy accent to change his speech so that the students can understand him.
He's boss of the entire executive branch. Whether you like Obama or not doesn't diminish his authority.
The Tea Party movement exists independent of the Republicans. Sure, many incumbent Republicans have done their best to attach themselves to the Tea Party's popularity, and the party in general has tried to portray itself as aligning. The faithful do seem to be buying it.
People tend to think the Tea Party is targeted only at Democrats. Not quite so. The Tea Party knocked out a lot of Republican incumbents and party favorites in the primaries in 2010. If it keeps going like this, the Republican Party may actually turn into a party with something to distinguish itself from the Democratic Party. But, no, I don't have much hope, since the co-opting above seems to be working.
Simple statement: If there is going to be a war -- which there is -- I prefer that fewer of our people die than theirs. Quite rational.
You conveniently leave off the next sentence, "As to whether the war was a good idea from the beginning, that's a different issue and quite debatable."
Those who have undergone successful government indoctrination do not question the validity of their leaders' wars.
However, those who have undergone successful liberal indoctrination do unerringly question the validity of any military action, although there are exceptions for when the liberals are in power.
The boss usually gets to express his opinion.
It doesn't meet government safety, environmental or fuel consumption regulations.
Good chance he'll get it.
It's not about sadism. It's about power, and those at the top are quite often the ones who want that power. As you say, the rest of us are perfectly happy that people just don't hurt each other, but we're not the ones in power, we're not the ones making the rules.
Now pardon me while I go have a smoke, making sure to light up at 20' away from this privately-owned business where everybody smokes. But not 19' away, because that's illegal.
No, I don't smoke. That's just an example.
I'm saying we can't just do free in the US carte blanch. We have to be selective in order to maximize resources.
Ill-prepared idiots going to college is fine with me as long as they're paying their own money and they're not slowing down my class.
Germany, for example. University is free, but only the good students get in, the ones who are more likely to make a degree worth it. Everybody else goes vocational school, which can actually be quite good and technical and set you up with a good-paying trade.
Free here would mean every idiot going, wasting our resources. As it is a LOT of students aren't prepared for college when they get there, so they simply shouldn't be there. A guy I knew was studying number lines! Yes, number lines, in college math. I learned that in, what, fourth grade?
His college had MATH 100 (the number lines course), 101 and 107, and none of the content of any of them was beyond my high school's non-AP math courses.