Blockbuster has bought my favourite independent movie rental place. I'll bet you a nickel that several of the shops you describe are, in fact, owned by Blockbuster.
I don't know of any independent movie rental shops in my area, and I don't live in the sticks. (North Dallas, TX)
There ARE challenges ahead. It IS a viable idea. However, if I were making the funding decisions, I'd spend that money on building cheap, reliable rockets (probably disposable, staged rockets) because that's the most economical lift option for the short to medium term.
After all, how are we going to get the stuff to build the space elevator into space? Pulling really hard on our bootstraps won't do it.
Hell, when the rudimentary little airplane I helped design for my senior project flew, I made sure there were about eighteen people with cameras around. I was as proud as a new daddy. : )
Only insofar as those discussions are largely populated with people who have an anti-American agenda.
Look, I've read a lot about this. I know a lot about airplanes. There are no credible claims to powered, controlled, repeatable, heavier than air flights before the Wright Brothers.
Feel free to pick nits with any of those criteria.
And, for the record, the Wright Brothers were PRICKS. They spent the next fifteen years suing everybody on Earth who had the temerity to try to design an airplane. They were responsible for halting the development of state-of-the-art aircraft in America, and slowing it world-wide, through the middle of World War I.
But, nevertheless, their systematic approach to the problem of flight was the first to be successful.
Wing warping and ailerons are VERY different. Glenn Curtiss invented the aileron, and THAT is the system that is used on just about every airplane on the planet.
Perhaps you meant "lateral control", which is the concept under which both ailerons and wing warping could both be categorized.
The engines in World War II that didn't say "Rolls Royce" or "Pratt & Whitney" on the side said "Wright".
Which is ironic, since the Wrights' engines were never as good as Glenn Curtiss' designs. Guess all was forgiven when Curtiss subsumed the Wright aircraft company.
I wouldn't necessarily argue that the Wrights invented aerodynamics, but they made incredible practical strides in the discipline.
Look, I think the Wrights were reprehensible bastards for the way they tried (and, to a large degree, succeeded) to patent not their invention, but the CONCEPT of powered flight. However, they DID perform the first powered, controlled, DOCUMENTED heavier-than-air flight. They were scrupulous about their documentation to bolster their patent claims.
Glenn Curtiss' inventions were the ones that made air travel possible, practical, and safe. In my opinion, he was the best engineer of the early 20th century.
Not until 1908, they didn't. They worked in carefully guarded secrecy. The only journalist invited to their flight was from an obscure horticulture paper (if I remember correctly) so that they would have verifiable documentation, but no publicity.
The Wrights were building a patent portfolio, not an airplane.
Since you don't seem to understand that differential thrust would produce a yaw moment, not a roll moment, I have a difficult time crediting your understanding of the situation.
If you want to get really pissed off about this, read "Unlocking the Sky" by Seth Shulman (sp?). It's a great read about the hoops Glenn Curtiss (a true aviation genius) had to jump through to avoid being bankrupted by the Wrights SCO-like patent tactics.
Totally destroyed any respect I might have had for the Wright brothers. They might have been very clever engineers, but they were also ruthless, greedy, selfish bastards. And don't you DARE tell me that's what America's all about.
Slashdot Mirror
Poor imitation, and a subsidiary.
No version of Showgirls makes sense. You can't polish a turd.
I didn't say anything about little. : )
Big dumb boosters are a great solution, for now.
Hollywood Video is owned by Blockbuster. Just thought I'd wreck your day. They sure wrecked mine.
Not for long.
Blockbuster has bought my favourite independent movie rental place. I'll bet you a nickel that several of the shops you describe are, in fact, owned by Blockbuster.
I don't know of any independent movie rental shops in my area, and I don't live in the sticks. (North Dallas, TX)
I'd be delighted to hear about options.
Both of you are confused as to what "spurn" means.
"Spur" means to encourage, or to force.
"Spurn" means to reject, as in a spurned lover.
Moving right along. Chicken. Egg. Who cares. Both are tasty, and Blockbuster is evil.
But if you ask questions, you'll BE smarter.
Which is better?
There ARE challenges ahead. It IS a viable idea. However, if I were making the funding decisions, I'd spend that money on building cheap, reliable rockets (probably disposable, staged rockets) because that's the most economical lift option for the short to medium term.
After all, how are we going to get the stuff to build the space elevator into space? Pulling really hard on our bootstraps won't do it.
Which, of course, means it's false, right?
You're silly.
Bullshit! Texas is in America and no American has ever done anything of significance in the history of the planet!
Didn't realize the importance...yeah right.
Hell, when the rudimentary little airplane I helped design for my senior project flew, I made sure there were about eighteen people with cameras around. I was as proud as a new daddy. : )
Only insofar as those discussions are largely populated with people who have an anti-American agenda.
Look, I've read a lot about this. I know a lot about airplanes. There are no credible claims to powered, controlled, repeatable, heavier than air flights before the Wright Brothers.
Feel free to pick nits with any of those criteria.
And, for the record, the Wright Brothers were PRICKS. They spent the next fifteen years suing everybody on Earth who had the temerity to try to design an airplane. They were responsible for halting the development of state-of-the-art aircraft in America, and slowing it world-wide, through the middle of World War I.
But, nevertheless, their systematic approach to the problem of flight was the first to be successful.
Uh, no.
Wing warping and ailerons are VERY different. Glenn Curtiss invented the aileron, and THAT is the system that is used on just about every airplane on the planet.
Perhaps you meant "lateral control", which is the concept under which both ailerons and wing warping could both be categorized.
...seeing as how the engine is the only source of energy into the system, I think those claims are pretty darn absurd.
The engines in World War II that didn't say "Rolls Royce" or "Pratt & Whitney" on the side said "Wright".
Which is ironic, since the Wrights' engines were never as good as Glenn Curtiss' designs. Guess all was forgiven when Curtiss subsumed the Wright aircraft company.
I wouldn't necessarily argue that the Wrights invented aerodynamics, but they made incredible practical strides in the discipline.
The SR-71 used its engine nacelles as ramjets in the mid-60's.
Just so's you know.
Are you disputing that the Wrights flew in 1903?
Look, I think the Wrights were reprehensible bastards for the way they tried (and, to a large degree, succeeded) to patent not their invention, but the CONCEPT of powered flight. However, they DID perform the first powered, controlled, DOCUMENTED heavier-than-air flight. They were scrupulous about their documentation to bolster their patent claims.
(which were ludicrous, by the way.)
Seconded.
Glenn Curtiss' inventions were the ones that made air travel possible, practical, and safe. In my opinion, he was the best engineer of the early 20th century.
Your supposition is incorrect.
The Wrights kept a very close leash on the journalists they invited. They wanted their accomplishment documented, not publicized.
Not until 1908, they didn't. They worked in carefully guarded secrecy. The only journalist invited to their flight was from an obscure horticulture paper (if I remember correctly) so that they would have verifiable documentation, but no publicity.
The Wrights were building a patent portfolio, not an airplane.
How do you figure? It uses an inclined plane to generate lift.
You can calculate the coefficient of lift and drag for an inclined plane. I've done it. In what way is this not generating lift?
A kite is qualitatively different, because it must be tied to the ground. But it does generate lift.
Since you don't seem to understand that differential thrust would produce a yaw moment, not a roll moment, I have a difficult time crediting your understanding of the situation.
What, did you see it?
If you want to get really pissed off about this, read "Unlocking the Sky" by Seth Shulman (sp?). It's a great read about the hoops Glenn Curtiss (a true aviation genius) had to jump through to avoid being bankrupted by the Wrights SCO-like patent tactics.
Totally destroyed any respect I might have had for the Wright brothers. They might have been very clever engineers, but they were also ruthless, greedy, selfish bastards. And don't you DARE tell me that's what America's all about.
: )
I think any scientist who laughs at such a well-founded engineering concept isn't a very good scientist.
Is it feasible now? Certainly not. But anybody who says it's impossible is a fool.