You can check out any time you like. Many have. In a feudal system, you were tied to the land. You couldn't leave.
I have a friend, We used to be real close. He couldn't go on With the American way. Sold his house Bought a ticket to the west coast. Now he gives a stand-up routine in LA.
What do you call it when the crumbs are a five course feast that can't be consumed? When the crumbs you throw out would be fought over by those with less means?
My father grew up with two pairs of pants. His mother had to wash them in a creek, and only had time to wash once a week. If you fell down in the mud and got dirty, you had to wear them the rest of the week. This was in south west Virginia.
I've got clothes that I've forgotten about. I've got pants I don't wear because I simply don't like them. I throw things in the washing machine and close the door to the room dedicated to it at my convenience.
Are the crumbs so bad? If you think so, you need to get over yourself.
Some organic methods are extremely efficient. For example, growing native species. A winery just around the corner from where I work converted from using specialty grapes native to Europe, to using the Muscadine grape native to North Carolina. They saved money on pesticides, fungicides, and fertilizer. It was a win/win/win/win.
Nuclear plant generates steam, that is returned to liquid form after passing through the turbine. Brine is returned to the sea, but water is pumped inland. The electricity is used by cities.
Only because you don't understand the meaning of the list.
It isn't to stop terrorist. It's to enable the ones in Washington to eliminate anyone they don't like. Once they get everyone on the list, they can pick and choose who to take out. All they have to say is, "See he was acting like a terrorist. He bought food."
You are completely wrong. The thickness of the flying wing is enough to give WAY more than enough headroom, and it is a wide open structure. Hell, converting a B2 into a passenger plane would allow for stadium seating during the inflight movie.
I spent 6 months building and learning to use my low budget one based on EMC2 and stepper motors. That is added into my 10yr build time for my airplane. I used it to carve my propeller.
Er, with a cessna, if you have a license you can take on passengers. Not paying passengers, but you can have them. A license to fly your experimental plane does not cover that. You need to get the plane certified to take passengers up in it, and a kit plane will never get that certification. The FAA has even said as much.
Why, oh why, did I built a 4-seater experimental airplane, when girlintraining says I can't ever have passengers? And why does Bob Barrows keep selling plans for that six-seater Bearhawk? Maybe, girlintraining just needs more training?
For experimental aircraft (of which homebuilts/kit builts/etc are a part of) the regulations are far more lax - basically it's just a sequence of inspections to make sure you're doing things "the right way" and avoiding obvious faults. I.e., you plane has a decent chance of flying and you used parts that are strong enough to withstand the rigors of such flight.
The inspection requirements are no longer enforced; though, highly recommended. There is only one official one at the end.
After that, it's mostly hands off - you build it how you think it should be built. It's basically anything goes to encourage innovation in aircraft. You're allowed to design your own completely from scratch, buy a set of plans and build it yourself (following as much or as little of the plans as you desire), buy a kit and build it, etc.
It is nothing at all about encouraging innovation; though, it does do that. It is about freedom. Do I get to live and die as I choose? Or does the government get to direct my every step to "protect" me? In this particular case, liberty won.
Definitely not sure what open-sourcing gives over traditional experimental plane building. Other than perhaps you don't have to buy a set of plans and can instead download them? Or are forced to document all your modifications and publish them?
Open source adds nothing. I bought my set of plans for $250. A small price to pay the designer/engineer who put literally YEARS into creating them. Cutting ribs with a CNC? Everybody is doing that now anyway. There is a company that will CNC cut all the steel tube for many kits, and charges only slightly more than it would cost you to order it from Dillsburg (a huge steel tube supplier in the US). You've still got to weld it all together.
And yet, I have right here in my grungy little hands, "FAA Form 8130-6, Application for U.S. Airworthiness Certificate". Section II has check marks in B,4 and 2 for "Special Airworthiness Certificate", "Experimental", and "Amateur Built".
In the US, it is illegal to lift out of ground effect without this form being accepted by the FAA.
Please educate yourself on Social Secuity. There is no trust fund. FICA is not partitioned off and put aside for when you get old. All the money goes into the general fund, and then a Treasury account is funded with what the Board thinks will be necessary for the next year.
Smoothbore guns were used for a while before rifling was invented, you know. For the typical range that a handgun is useful, rifling isn't all that critical.
Yes, it is an uncomfortable truth that no one has heard of. There isn't even any politicians using it to make power grabs with new regulatory and tax regimes.
The basic claim Hansen made is that these recent heat waves are so far out of the ordinary that it would be virtually impossible* for them to have occurred without global warming.
And the world is so complex, defying the laws of entropy, that it is virtually* impossible that it isn't created and controlled by a supreme intelligence.
Another way to look at it is: "A soldier should carry a knife for eating, a sword for dueling, a dagger for murdering, a claymore for horses, a razor for shaving, a bowie for skinning, a throwing knife for throwing."
Why are we trying to make The One True Edged Weapon, which if such a thing were built would be too sharp for eating, too short for dueling, too long for murdering, too short for horses, too dangerous for shaving, too awkward for skinning and too heavy to throw? (and cost $27,000,000...)
Because, once you load the soldier down with all those knife weapons, he doesn't have the capacity to carry his rations? Maybe it would make more sense to just stick a knife on the end of his rifle?
Actually if you bother to read the article where the German pilots were surprised to find themselves on an equal footing in a dog fight
The thing is, this is going to be true for any fighter jet since the F-16. That was the first plane, I believe, that was fly-by-wire and had sensors to limit the G forces on the pilot. The aerodynamic egineers can EASILY draw up an airframe that will kill any and all occupants. The limiting factor of maneuverability of modern military aircraft is human factors, and that is going to put the aircraft all all nations on a similar footing.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes it is.
You can check out any time you like. Many have. In a feudal system, you were tied to the land. You couldn't leave.
I have a friend,
We used to be real close.
He couldn't go on
With the American way.
Sold his house
Bought a ticket to the west coast.
Now he gives a stand-up routine in LA.
What do you call it when the crumbs are a five course feast that can't be consumed? When the crumbs you throw out would be fought over by those with less means?
My father grew up with two pairs of pants. His mother had to wash them in a creek, and only had time to wash once a week. If you fell down in the mud and got dirty, you had to wear them the rest of the week. This was in south west Virginia.
I've got clothes that I've forgotten about. I've got pants I don't wear because I simply don't like them. I throw things in the washing machine and close the door to the room dedicated to it at my convenience.
Are the crumbs so bad? If you think so, you need to get over yourself.
Look on the Play Store for Garmin, Naviator, Jeppenson, ForeFlight, AnywhereMap, Air Navigation Pro.
I don't think you looked very hard.
Some organic methods are extremely efficient. For example, growing native species. A winery just around the corner from where I work converted from using specialty grapes native to Europe, to using the Muscadine grape native to North Carolina. They saved money on pesticides, fungicides, and fertilizer. It was a win/win/win/win.
They also produce a wine that I like.
Nuclear plant generates steam, that is returned to liquid form after passing through the turbine. Brine is returned to the sea, but water is pumped inland. The electricity is used by cities.
Pure magic.
Maybe they could stop fucking around in other people's countries?
Only because you don't understand the meaning of the list.
It isn't to stop terrorist. It's to enable the ones in Washington to eliminate anyone they don't like. Once they get everyone on the list, they can pick and choose who to take out. All they have to say is, "See he was acting like a terrorist. He bought food."
Ever eaten MRE's. I swear, they must be pre-aged!!
The Concorde was not profitable because Boeing got the mission it was designed for (Europe to Las Angeles) shut down by buying themselves a law.
You are completely wrong. The thickness of the flying wing is enough to give WAY more than enough headroom, and it is a wide open structure. Hell, converting a B2 into a passenger plane would allow for stadium seating during the inflight movie.
So don't use this product in cars. Use it for home heating oil, which is just diesel with the road use taxes removed (at least in the US).
Since the CAA was shut down in the 1950's, I guess that will be an issue.
The rest of what you typed is completely misinformed nonsense.
Where are you getting the CNC mill from?
I spent 6 months building and learning to use my low budget one based on EMC2 and stepper motors. That is added into my 10yr build time for my airplane. I used it to carve my propeller.
Er, with a cessna, if you have a license you can take on passengers. Not paying passengers, but you can have them. A license to fly your experimental plane does not cover that. You need to get the plane certified to take passengers up in it, and a kit plane will never get that certification. The FAA has even said as much.
Why, oh why, did I built a 4-seater experimental airplane, when girlintraining says I can't ever have passengers? And why does Bob Barrows keep selling plans for that six-seater Bearhawk? Maybe, girlintraining just needs more training?
For experimental aircraft (of which homebuilts/kit builts/etc are a part of) the regulations are far more lax - basically it's just a sequence of inspections to make sure you're doing things "the right way" and avoiding obvious faults. I.e., you plane has a decent chance of flying and you used parts that are strong enough to withstand the rigors of such flight.
The inspection requirements are no longer enforced; though, highly recommended. There is only one official one at the end.
After that, it's mostly hands off - you build it how you think it should be built. It's basically anything goes to encourage innovation in aircraft. You're allowed to design your own completely from scratch, buy a set of plans and build it yourself (following as much or as little of the plans as you desire), buy a kit and build it, etc.
It is nothing at all about encouraging innovation; though, it does do that. It is about freedom. Do I get to live and die as I choose? Or does the government get to direct my every step to "protect" me? In this particular case, liberty won.
Definitely not sure what open-sourcing gives over traditional experimental plane building. Other than perhaps you don't have to buy a set of plans and can instead download them? Or are forced to document all your modifications and publish them?
Open source adds nothing. I bought my set of plans for $250. A small price to pay the designer/engineer who put literally YEARS into creating them. Cutting ribs with a CNC? Everybody is doing that now anyway. There is a company that will CNC cut all the steel tube for many kits, and charges only slightly more than it would cost you to order it from Dillsburg (a huge steel tube supplier in the US). You've still got to weld it all together.
And yet, I have right here in my grungy little hands, "FAA Form 8130-6, Application for U.S. Airworthiness Certificate". Section II has check marks in B,4 and 2 for "Special Airworthiness Certificate", "Experimental", and "Amateur Built".
In the US, it is illegal to lift out of ground effect without this form being accepted by the FAA.
Please educate yourself on Social Secuity. There is no trust fund. FICA is not partitioned off and put aside for when you get old. All the money goes into the general fund, and then a Treasury account is funded with what the Board thinks will be necessary for the next year.
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/features/the-myth-of-the-social-security-trust-fund/
NC just tried to implement a law to forbid communities from doing just this.
Smoothbore guns were used for a while before rifling was invented, you know. For the typical range that a handgun is useful, rifling isn't all that critical.
The strongest epoxy I've personally used, MGS L285 system, has a tensile strength of 70-80 N/mm^2 (10-11kpsi).
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=mgs%20epoxy%20285&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cozybuilders.org%2Fref_info%2FMGS_L285_properties.pdf&ei=nJQ2UOKdI4PIiwL0i4HgCQ&usg=AFQjCNEGvFmpTE0_Zk5-KZoWcwYlvKaeXg&cad=rja
Some chopped fiber filler will easily make up the difference, but it would need a radically new type of dispenser.
Yes, it is an uncomfortable truth that no one has heard of. There isn't even any politicians using it to make power grabs with new regulatory and tax regimes.
The basic claim Hansen made is that these recent heat waves are so far out of the ordinary that it would be virtually impossible* for them to have occurred without global warming.
And the world is so complex, defying the laws of entropy, that it is virtually* impossible that it isn't created and controlled by a supreme intelligence.
*Less than 0.01% probability
Another way to look at it is: "A soldier should carry a knife for eating, a sword for dueling, a dagger for murdering, a claymore for horses, a razor for shaving, a bowie for skinning, a throwing knife for throwing."
Why are we trying to make The One True Edged Weapon, which if such a thing were built would be too sharp for eating, too short for dueling, too long for murdering, too short for horses, too dangerous for shaving, too awkward for skinning and too heavy to throw? (and cost $27,000,000...)
Because, once you load the soldier down with all those knife weapons, he doesn't have the capacity to carry his rations? Maybe it would make more sense to just stick a knife on the end of his rifle?
But do they have a long way to go and a short time to get there?
Actually if you bother to read the article where the German pilots were surprised to find themselves on an equal footing in a dog fight
The thing is, this is going to be true for any fighter jet since the F-16. That was the first plane, I believe, that was fly-by-wire and had sensors to limit the G forces on the pilot. The aerodynamic egineers can EASILY draw up an airframe that will kill any and all occupants. The limiting factor of maneuverability of modern military aircraft is human factors, and that is going to put the aircraft all all nations on a similar footing.