The elevator is the only paradigm shifting technology that will make access to space cheaper. The technology that is used at the moment is basically developed 1940's tech - very refined and at a higher performance level - but it is still old tech. Think internal combustion engine - that's 100 years old and the performance is not an order of magnitude better after 100 years - the same with rocketry. The idea that we can incrementally improve it and get costs down is a farce.
The Space Elevator is the way to go....
http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/studies/final_rep or t/pdf/521Edwards.pdf
and
http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/studies/final_rep or t/pdf/472Edwards.pdf.bak
If I've a thing about the Space Elevator it's 'cos I think it is a more realistic means to lower 'launch' costs than anything else out there.
My post from a while ago explains my reasoning better than I remember it doing.
When I saw the theatrical release of Fellowship I thought it was a bit flat.
In fact I thought that the Middle Earth of Fellowship was not beautiful enough, that it was too dark and stark, certainly not green enough. I blame it on Jackson living in Wellington which is a bit like that - whereas I grew up in Christchurch and my vision of Middle Earth was based on my childhood memories of the very places they filmed the movie.The South Island was for me Middle Earth! But the movie I think lost a lot of that feeling for me.
The extended DVD was a revelation therefore. Not only did all the characters gain depth and breadth but so did Middle Earth. I went from not feeling too special about the movie, not wanting to see it again, and being bemused by my sister's enthusiasm, to rapture at how the extended version worked so much better.
So try the Extended Version... I'll probably wait for the Extended Two Towers as well rather than get the DVD release next week. And I agree with the poster who said Towers seemed fake and artificial - but it was still a good movie.
I hope Hong Kong gets the extended Movies on screen - but I'm not holding my breath.
Yeah but you are not going to be modded higher as there are a huge number of people who 1. either have no interest in religion and are not interested in the consequences of it - or 2. are bigotted religious people who have no interest in your point being advanced.
I myself think your point is pertinent and worthwhile - but don't expect Slashdot to be unbiased and get modded up.
I think Carl Sagan said it best in his works - especially "The Demon Haunted world" when it referred to belief in religion as akin to an invisble dragon that sat in your garage that only you could see.
If you can't prove it through the Scientific Method - then what is the fucking point? (I'm paraphrasing) - the Scientific Method has provided a heap more amazing devices than religion has ever done, reduced poverty and increased well being much more - religion sucks as a way for improving the lot of people - give it up dude.
But this forum is not one that is open to clear thinking so don't expect an up-mod - you'll sit on zero forever...
I've an old 500MHz G3 iBook and just bought Final Cut Express for home video stuff and it works just fine. In fact it works better than iMovie which was much too unstable on the iBook.
Sure you don't get real time previews with the G3 - but it is not too much of a handicap - and certainly better than iMovie.
My buying intentions? - Within the next year get a new (G5?) Desktop and keep using the G3 iBook as my laptop for another year or so.
Even after two years my white iBook turns heads - I hope that the metal look powerbooks get the IceBook look.... much cooler than those tin can pizza boxes....
Yeah - I can guess what will happen to Apple sales - stagnate...
I've been phoned twice by Apple reps with discounts on desktop products - no way I'd go there matey... And then there are the drops in PowerBook prices the other week - not such a bad idea really - and 'G5' will not be in the PowerBook line for a while - but don't think about getting an iBook.... seems due for a revision.
This site has a different story. In summary it appears that Beech had all the parameters for the craft set out and THEN approached Rutan. If so then the onus on the poor performance and cost falls back to the Beech management.
Management have more responsibility in this in any case as they are the ones who make the final decisions. In the case of the loss of the Shuttle Columbia do we blame the engineers or the management? Of course it's the management who made the decisions, and controlled the process of making both of the crafts flight worthy.
It seems to me that in the case of the Beech Starship management need to take the heat as much as all those aero engineers and Rutan himself. It was a total business and engineering failure - the opposite of synergistic perhaps?
Search Google for some sites.... this is the series that I read in the library when I was a kid - great retro future stuff. I came across an old edition in a second hand bookshop and my friends couldn't understand the reason for the gurgles of delight.
And for real inside guff on Newton and Sculley.... here
Yeah - a bit off topic I know - but interesting... this is an alternative vision of the direction that Apple under Sculley was heading in - I think Jobs has a better strategy. I'm surprised that Sony hasn't tried to buy Apple before now.
Pixar = movies, Universal = Music, iPod = Hardware, OS X = OS.... looks like the picture is pretty much complete....
Here are some photos of the Apple Knowledge Navigator. This is a page from the larger document about the Knowledge Navigator mentioned in my other post.
And here is a video - very s l o w - someone mirror it....
I remember the same video - it was around 1989 or so. There was one guy sitting on a park bench with a newspaper, he pressed it to the flat screen it then OCRed it and began to help him to learn to read it, prompting him as he read it out aloud.
Sculley believed passionately about this. There is a paper he wrote about the Knowledge Navigator here
So the Knowledge Navigator was a real mix of technologies. But ultimately such video productions and thought experiments were all about developing the Apple brand. I saw the video at an Apple tech show in Auckland NZ and that was preaching to the converted - but Sculley saw this brand development as crucial. Wired has a great article about Apple the brand. Sculley developed Apple into one of the most recognised brands in the world.... and Apple are still living on his legacy.
But Sculley also viewed the idea of this sort of technology, and especially Newton, as the future. I recall that he went on after leaving Apple to work with a company developing a wireless device for the Newton. He is still a believer in this vision - this article from 2000 suggests a merger with 3Com - Palm and Apple = Newton redux = iPalm?
Hong Kongers regard Hong Kong as a country that has moved from one colonial ruler (Britain) to another (The Peoples Republic of China). There is a border (boundary) between the two 'countries' - you have to get a visa to visit between them (unless you get a permanent visa), there are two currencies even two flags... Hong Kongers would be horrified if the unwashed of China could come here with impunity - as tourists perhaps - but please leave quickly.
The letter and the spirit of the law might be different - but I can tell you we Hong Kongers are proud of our small country - and HKers feel little affinity towards the PRC beyond a pride in the Chinese culture in general.
And if you are a Mainlander Ling Qi - your pride in lording it over Hong Kong is misplaced....
In Hong Kong many housing estates, offices and schools are using the Octopus card for identification. There are 9 million cards in Hong Kong with a population of only 7 million. One of the reasons is that some people require two cards - perhaps one for the office and travel, maybe another for the housing estate.
I went to a conference recently and I was required to register with my Octopus Card to get entry to the conference floor. It was useful because I went back later in the week and of course I had the card with me so got without any re-registering.
School kids use them to get into school and a roll call is instantly made up. Entry and exit to the school can then be monitored. This is not so different from the access cards I have used at several offices - the difference is that I've had my Octpus card for years now and theoretically all the transactions, travel, entry and entrance could be recorded. A bit scarey I admit.
However there is no link back to me. There is no name attached to the card, and no connection with a bank account. So there is a limit to the amount of data o be tracked.
There are a lot of uses for the cards.... it is pretty good technology.... except that they in effect have a monopoly and charge 10% commission on the sales going through there system. Imagine having a monopoly on cash and making a profit everytime you used your coins and notes.
I think you will find that there will be more and more of these cards used. Already Nokia has built it into some of their phones in Hong Kong, you can buy watches with it built in - people like it - very easy, no coins, no need to rummage around for the train ticket just wave your wallet at the gate. Ditto for keys to the office, home - soon perhaps your car. They're already used for payment at car parks and soon car meters.
People won't resist this so the best thing is to build in safeguards, walls between systems so no accumulation of data is made unduly.
Face it - it's coming. It's here in Hong Kong now.
You're correct when you say that this has never been done before However....
1. Nanotube existence - the nanotubes exist, it's the fibres they are having trouble making. The nanotubes are strong enough but the way they construct the bundles of nanotubes needs more R&D. However increasing the strength several times seems reasonable. They are already an order of magnitube stronger that anything else made - think of the potential even with thse things.
2. Robotic climbers - think trains. The difference is not so great and the distances similar, and the exposure to gravity and wear and tear lower.
3. Length of the ribbons - How many kilometers of unlit fibre optic are there in the US? How many strands of copper in the first undersea cables 100 years ago? How many kilometers of cotton thread are there in all the clothing in your wardrobe? How many kilimeters of steel wire in the Golden Gate Bridge? I think this sort of industrial scaling is trivial once the basic process is demonstrated.
As I said in my post to the last Slashdot article - we should concentrate on the potential of this - how will this affect our lives if they do this in the next 10 years.... this would be a change on the order of steam, electricity, motor cars and Integrated Circuits in power to change the world.
I'm pretty confident that the issues you've raised are ones of degree, and not show stoppers.
http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/studies/final_rep or t/pdf/472Edwards.pdf
Tells you everything you need to know.... and more...
Wish people would move on from gaping at the idea of the space elevator - and actually post some idea of the consequences this will have on the near future...
Suddenly power sats ( http://www.powersat.com )don't sound outrageous after all.
I'm appalled at the lack of imagination shown by most of these posts.
First off if you read the PDF (15M) report to Nasa prepared by Bradley C. Edwards to satisfy the requirements of his $500 000 grant you will readily see that this is totally feasible.
Next check out the website - where they are calling for people to express interest in working on this project. They expect to be hiring in the next year or so. You'll also see that serious people are taking this seriously. Do you want a job?
Next understand that $17B is not very much money. Considering that BP just spent $6.7B on a oil company in Russia and has plans for more purchases.
I meantion BP because they have a plan to move beyond oil.... BP Solar is BP's attempt to become a broader energy company (check out their new sun logo) instead of an oil company. The High Lift systems news page says: -
BP Solar - a subsidiary of British Petroleum, currently doing $300M in annual sales. Our discussions have focused on BP's interest in using the SE for deployment of a solar energy satellite. Several items that came up included possible collaborative efforts, the performance of our system and the possibility of BP using our system. They are considering writing a letter of endorsement
If BP with the cash they have can throw $6.75 B at Russia they could, over 5 years, finance a large share of the Space Elevator. Who needs the Government? In fact Nasa would make sure it costs more to build than it should. Nasa is a bureaucracy, not a business, and is ill-suited to the sort of cost control required of economically viable business decision. Only communists would argue that a Space Elevator should be built and controlled by government.
These are High Lift's vision for the main use for the Space Elevator. Imagine a fleet of these beaming power to anywhere on earth. Every country on the planet could get cheap electricity without the huge national grid infrastructure required now. Without the huge investments in time and resources to build power stations - and without the fossil fuel use.
Use your imagination.
These ideas have been the subject of SF for decades - but the Space Elevator is now possible due to those nifty Carbon Nano-tubes.
When your imagination focussed by the reality of this thing actually being built in the near term (5 years) everything changes - and it'll change for us not our children. It'll change our careers.
Imagine this - an electric airplane that is powered by a Powersat beaming microwaves to it. No fuel to carry, super efficient travel - and at what speeds?
These guys are planning for the Space Elevator to be operational SOON - they have realistic timelines.
What I want to see here is some discussion of the uses that could realistically be made of a space elevator. We're the generation that will built it, use it and be changed by it. I like the parallel to be made with electricity, or flight, or the steam engine - in the early stages everyone probably dismissed it - and the world changed despite them.
What would you realistically (with a nod towards economic viability) do with the low launch costs they're projecting - $10/LB...
The first real commercial jet aircraft was the British Comet. The concept of the jet was not solely German and the British engine was developed independently... and in fact the Germans probably used Whittle's research to develop their jet.
However the jet engine was first proven during WWII (though probably it would still have developed) and the 747 was developed first as a military cargo plane - the C5 but Boeing was beaten out by the C5 Galaxy.
I wish people would use the power of google before spouting off on stuff they don't know about - and some links to justify their opinions would be good too.
Funny how some people are convinced that the Bernoulli principle keeps a plane flying - it is the entrained air cause by the shape of the wing and the angle of attack that produced the lift.
The angle of attack of the rotor blades (or wings) force air down causing the chopper to fly. At low alitudes there is also a certain ground effect and backwash that helps - but out of ground effect it is the push of the air.
Think about this - the personal helicopter recently seen on Slashdot can't use a wing Bernoulli type principle - it must force air in the opposite direction to go up. Simple rilly.
Flight is caused by air being pushed down and the airplane goes in the opposite direction - up. This is the Coanda effect - and it is also the reason sailboats sail. As a long time sailor I know from experience.
While Bernoulli's equations are correct, their proper application to aerodynamic lift proceeds quite differently than the common explanation.
That said - it should be noted that this submarine DOES fly like an airplane - by using plane to deflect the water like a wing. Given than water is incompressible the Bernoulli effect can not apply.
Yeah - Chimera wins.... but only for the moment - Safari is almost there and it is a beta release. The biggy is obviously.... duh.... tabs - especially for slashdot, google news and new scientist..... but also the rendering.... if the next releases don't measure up then Chimera wins for sure - the speed is fine, the rendering fine and the tabs.... did I meantion the tabs..... how could anyone desing a modern browser without them..... come on.... why spawn a window for every page.... duh
Rock on and hany out at Puy de Dome you might see a UFO or something....
Slashdot Mirror
The elevator is the only paradigm shifting technology that will make access to space cheaper. The technology that is used at the moment is basically developed 1940's tech - very refined and at a higher performance level - but it is still old tech. Think internal combustion engine - that's 100 years old and the performance is not an order of magnitude better after 100 years - the same with rocketry. The idea that we can incrementally improve it and get costs down is a farce.
p or t/pdf/521Edwards.pdf
p or t/pdf/472Edwards.pdf.bak
The Space Elevator is the way to go....
http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/studies/final_re
and
http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/studies/final_re
If I've a thing about the Space Elevator it's 'cos I think it is a more realistic means to lower 'launch' costs than anything else out there.
My post from a while ago explains my reasoning better than I remember it doing.
I know what you mean.
When I saw the theatrical release of Fellowship I thought it was a bit flat.
In fact I thought that the Middle Earth of Fellowship was not beautiful enough, that it was too dark and stark, certainly not green enough. I blame it on Jackson living in Wellington which is a bit like that - whereas I grew up in Christchurch and my vision of Middle Earth was based on my childhood memories of the very places they filmed the movie.The South Island was for me Middle Earth! But the movie I think lost a lot of that feeling for me.
The extended DVD was a revelation therefore. Not only did all the characters gain depth and breadth but so did Middle Earth. I went from not feeling too special about the movie, not wanting to see it again, and being bemused by my sister's enthusiasm, to rapture at how the extended version worked so much better.
So try the Extended Version... I'll probably wait for the Extended Two Towers as well rather than get the DVD release next week. And I agree with the poster who said Towers seemed fake and artificial - but it was still a good movie.
I hope Hong Kong gets the extended Movies on screen - but I'm not holding my breath.
ahahahahah - got a guffaw out of me....
Yeah but you are not going to be modded higher as there are a huge number of people who 1. either have no interest in religion and are not interested in the consequences of it - or 2. are bigotted religious people who have no interest in your point being advanced.
I myself think your point is pertinent and worthwhile - but don't expect Slashdot to be unbiased and get modded up.
I think Carl Sagan said it best in his works - especially "The Demon Haunted world" when it referred to belief in religion as akin to an invisble dragon that sat in your garage that only you could see.
If you can't prove it through the Scientific Method - then what is the fucking point? (I'm paraphrasing) - the Scientific Method has provided a heap more amazing devices than religion has ever done, reduced poverty and increased well being much more - religion sucks as a way for improving the lot of people - give it up dude.
But this forum is not one that is open to clear thinking so don't expect an up-mod - you'll sit on zero forever...
I've an old 500MHz G3 iBook and just bought Final Cut Express for home video stuff and it works just fine. In fact it works better than iMovie which was much too unstable on the iBook.
Sure you don't get real time previews with the G3 - but it is not too much of a handicap - and certainly better than iMovie.
My buying intentions? - Within the next year get a new (G5?) Desktop and keep using the G3 iBook as my laptop for another year or so.
Even after two years my white iBook turns heads - I hope that the metal look powerbooks get the IceBook look.... much cooler than those tin can pizza boxes....
Yeah - I can guess what will happen to Apple sales - stagnate...
I've been phoned twice by Apple reps with discounts on desktop products - no way I'd go there matey... And then there are the drops in PowerBook prices the other week - not such a bad idea really - and 'G5' will not be in the PowerBook line for a while - but don't think about getting an iBook.... seems due for a revision.
It'll be interesting watching that keynote...
Thanks for the info MtViewGuy - and for others interested there are some interesting photos and info here and here and a directory listing here.
This site has a different story. In summary it appears that Beech had all the parameters for the craft set out and THEN approached Rutan. If so then the onus on the poor performance and cost falls back to the Beech management.
Management have more responsibility in this in any case as they are the ones who make the final decisions. In the case of the loss of the Shuttle Columbia do we blame the engineers or the management? Of course it's the management who made the decisions, and controlled the process of making both of the crafts flight worthy.
It seems to me that in the case of the Beech Starship management need to take the heat as much as all those aero engineers and Rutan himself. It was a total business and engineering failure - the opposite of synergistic perhaps?
Ah another fan of Tom Swift.
Search Google for some sites.... this is the series that I read in the library when I was a kid - great retro future stuff. I came across an old edition in a second hand bookshop and my friends couldn't understand the reason for the gurgles of delight.
Check out the ads for the Newton here
.... looks like the picture is pretty much complete....
And for real inside guff on Newton and Sculley.... here
Yeah - a bit off topic I know - but interesting... this is an alternative vision of the direction that Apple under Sculley was heading in - I think Jobs has a better strategy. I'm surprised that Sony hasn't tried to buy Apple before now.
Pixar = movies, Universal = Music, iPod = Hardware, OS X = OS
http://www.billzarchy.com/clips/clips_apple_nav.ht m
The video is 61 Megabytes - it plays fine in Quicktime once you download it - but it is not stream-able.
Here are some photos of the Apple Knowledge Navigator. This is a page from the larger document about the Knowledge Navigator mentioned in my other post.
And here is a video - very s l o w - someone mirror it....
I remember the same video - it was around 1989 or so. There was one guy sitting on a park bench with a newspaper, he pressed it to the flat screen it then OCRed it and began to help him to learn to read it, prompting him as he read it out aloud.
Sculley believed passionately about this. There is a paper he wrote about the Knowledge Navigator here
So the Knowledge Navigator was a real mix of technologies. But ultimately such video productions and thought experiments were all about developing the Apple brand. I saw the video at an Apple tech show in Auckland NZ and that was preaching to the converted - but Sculley saw this brand development as crucial. Wired has a great article about Apple the brand. Sculley developed Apple into one of the most recognised brands in the world.... and Apple are still living on his legacy.
But Sculley also viewed the idea of this sort of technology, and especially Newton, as the future. I recall that he went on after leaving Apple to work with a company developing a wireless device for the Newton. He is still a believer in this vision - this article from 2000 suggests a merger with 3Com - Palm and Apple = Newton redux = iPalm?
Right - has to be a troll.
Hong Kongers regard Hong Kong as a country that has moved from one colonial ruler (Britain) to another (The Peoples Republic of China). There is a border (boundary) between the two 'countries' - you have to get a visa to visit between them (unless you get a permanent visa), there are two currencies even two flags... Hong Kongers would be horrified if the unwashed of China could come here with impunity - as tourists perhaps - but please leave quickly.
The letter and the spirit of the law might be different - but I can tell you we Hong Kongers are proud of our small country - and HKers feel little affinity towards the PRC beyond a pride in the Chinese culture in general.
And if you are a Mainlander Ling Qi - your pride in lording it over Hong Kong is misplaced....
You know what we think of the PRC?.... Mamahuhu!
The original Universal Studios Press Release is here
There is also an interesting pre-King Kong interview with Jackson on March 04 where there are only hints of King Kong being a possible new project.
This site describes how you can complie PHP to byte code for a proposed PHP# implementation.
In Hong Kong many housing estates, offices and schools are using the Octopus card for identification. There are 9 million cards in Hong Kong with a population of only 7 million. One of the reasons is that some people require two cards - perhaps one for the office and travel, maybe another for the housing estate.
I went to a conference recently and I was required to register with my Octopus Card to get entry to the conference floor. It was useful because I went back later in the week and of course I had the card with me so got without any re-registering.
School kids use them to get into school and a roll call is instantly made up. Entry and exit to the school can then be monitored. This is not so different from the access cards I have used at several offices - the difference is that I've had my Octpus card for years now and theoretically all the transactions, travel, entry and entrance could be recorded. A bit scarey I admit.
However there is no link back to me. There is no name attached to the card, and no connection with a bank account. So there is a limit to the amount of data o be tracked.
There are a lot of uses for the cards.... it is pretty good technology.... except that they in effect have a monopoly and charge 10% commission on the sales going through there system. Imagine having a monopoly on cash and making a profit everytime you used your coins and notes.
I think you will find that there will be more and more of these cards used. Already Nokia has built it into some of their phones in Hong Kong, you can buy watches with it built in - people like it - very easy, no coins, no need to rummage around for the train ticket just wave your wallet at the gate. Ditto for keys to the office, home - soon perhaps your car. They're already used for payment at car parks and soon car meters.
People won't resist this so the best thing is to build in safeguards, walls between systems so no accumulation of data is made unduly.
Face it - it's coming. It's here in Hong Kong now.
You're right - and you're wrong.
You're correct when you say that this has never been done before However....
1. Nanotube existence - the nanotubes exist, it's the fibres they are having trouble making. The nanotubes are strong enough but the way they construct the bundles of nanotubes needs more R&D. However increasing the strength several times seems reasonable. They are already an order of magnitube stronger that anything else made - think of the potential even with thse things.
2. Robotic climbers - think trains. The difference is not so great and the distances similar, and the exposure to gravity and wear and tear lower.
3. Length of the ribbons - How many kilometers of unlit fibre optic are there in the US? How many strands of copper in the first undersea cables 100 years ago? How many kilometers of cotton thread are there in all the clothing in your wardrobe? How many kilimeters of steel wire in the Golden Gate Bridge? I think this sort of industrial scaling is trivial once the basic process is demonstrated.
As I said in my post to the last Slashdot article - we should concentrate on the potential of this - how will this affect our lives if they do this in the next 10 years.... this would be a change on the order of steam, electricity, motor cars and Integrated Circuits in power to change the world.
I'm pretty confident that the issues you've raised are ones of degree, and not show stoppers.
Guys read the Space Elevator PDF.... 15M
p or t/pdf/472Edwards.pdf
http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/studies/final_re
Tells you everything you need to know.... and more...
Wish people would move on from gaping at the idea of the space elevator - and actually post some idea of the consequences this will have on the near future...
Suddenly power sats ( http://www.powersat.com )don't sound outrageous after all.
I'm appalled at the lack of imagination shown by most of these posts.
First off if you read the PDF (15M) report to Nasa prepared by Bradley C. Edwards to satisfy the requirements of his $500 000 grant you will readily see that this is totally feasible.
Next check out the website - where they are calling for people to express interest in working on this project. They expect to be hiring in the next year or so. You'll also see that serious people are taking this seriously. Do you want a job?
Next understand that $17B is not very much money. Considering that BP just spent $6.7B on a oil company in Russia and has plans for more purchases.
I meantion BP because they have a plan to move beyond oil.... BP Solar is BP's attempt to become a broader energy company (check out their new sun logo) instead of an oil company. The High Lift systems news page says: -
BP Solar - a subsidiary of British Petroleum, currently doing $300M in annual sales. Our discussions have focused on BP's interest in using the SE for deployment of a solar energy satellite. Several items that came up included possible collaborative efforts, the performance of our system and the possibility of BP using our system. They are considering writing a letter of endorsement
If BP with the cash they have can throw $6.75 B at Russia they could, over 5 years, finance a large share of the Space Elevator. Who needs the Government? In fact Nasa would make sure it costs more to build than it should. Nasa is a bureaucracy, not a business, and is ill-suited to the sort of cost control required of economically viable business decision. Only communists would argue that a Space Elevator should be built and controlled by government.
What would BP Solar do? Build Power Sats....
These are High Lift's vision for the main use for the Space Elevator. Imagine a fleet of these beaming power to anywhere on earth. Every country on the planet could get cheap electricity without the huge national grid infrastructure required now. Without the huge investments in time and resources to build power stations - and without the fossil fuel use.
Use your imagination.
These ideas have been the subject of SF for decades - but the Space Elevator is now possible due to those nifty Carbon Nano-tubes.
When your imagination focussed by the reality of this thing actually being built in the near term (5 years) everything changes - and it'll change for us not our children. It'll change our careers.
Imagine this - an electric airplane that is powered by a Powersat beaming microwaves to it. No fuel to carry, super efficient travel - and at what speeds?
These guys are planning for the Space Elevator to be operational SOON - they have realistic timelines.
What I want to see here is some discussion of the uses that could realistically be made of a space elevator. We're the generation that will built it, use it and be changed by it. I like the parallel to be made with electricity, or flight, or the steam engine - in the early stages everyone probably dismissed it - and the world changed despite them.
What would you realistically (with a nod towards economic viability) do with the low launch costs they're projecting - $10/LB...
Ideas anyone?
Germany created and flew the first jet fighters.... Commercial jets are descended from those planes.
Not necessarily.....
http://www.midlandairmuseum.org.uk/thejet.html
The first real commercial jet aircraft was the British Comet. The concept of the jet was not solely German and the British engine was developed independently... and in fact the Germans probably used Whittle's research to develop their jet.
However the jet engine was first proven during WWII (though probably it would still have developed) and the 747 was developed first as a military cargo plane - the C5 but Boeing was beaten out by the C5 Galaxy.
I wish people would use the power of google before spouting off on stuff they don't know about - and some links to justify their opinions would be good too.
Yup you're right.
Funny how some people are convinced that the Bernoulli principle keeps a plane flying - it is the entrained air cause by the shape of the wing and the angle of attack that produced the lift.
The angle of attack of the rotor blades (or wings) force air down causing the chopper to fly. At low alitudes there is also a certain ground effect and backwash that helps - but out of ground effect it is the push of the air.
Think about this - the personal helicopter recently seen on Slashdot can't use a wing Bernoulli type principle - it must force air in the opposite direction to go up. Simple rilly.
Finally someone gets it....
p ublished/coanda_effect.html
Flight is caused by air being pushed down and the airplane goes in the opposite direction - up. This is the Coanda effect - and it is also the reason sailboats sail. As a long time sailor I know from experience.
This website has it all in full.
http://www.jefraskin.com/forjef2/jefweb-compiled/
This notes the following: -
While Bernoulli's equations are correct, their proper application to aerodynamic lift proceeds quite differently than the common explanation.
That said - it should be noted that this submarine DOES fly like an airplane - by using plane to deflect the water like a wing. Given than water is incompressible the Bernoulli effect can not apply.
Cool machine - I want one.
Yeah - Chimera wins.... but only for the moment - Safari is almost there and it is a beta release. The biggy is obviously.... duh.... tabs - especially for slashdot, google news and new scientist..... but also the rendering.... if the next releases don't measure up then Chimera wins for sure - the speed is fine, the rendering fine and the tabs.... did I meantion the tabs..... how could anyone desing a modern browser without them ..... come on.... why spawn a window for every page.... duh
Rock on and hany out at Puy de Dome you might see a UFO or something....
But it might be the beer....