Well, when CRS-7 failed, it did destroy a reasonably valuable piece, the International Docking Adapter A.
Interestingly, the Dragon would most likely have survived (and will now in the case of a similar failure) had the software been setup to deploy the parachutes in case of a breakup like that. Unfortunately, the IDA was in the trunk, which wouldn't have been saved by the parachutes.
I don't normally reply to ACs, but the fuel cost is roughly negligible. The propellants used for landing are mostly the contingency propellants they woudl need to cary any way in case of a problem with one or more engines. As far as refurbishment costs go, we'll see, but the second landed booster has had at least 10 full duration test firings since landing, without anything going boom, and minimal refurbishment.
And finally, ok, so SpaceX is getting government funds. Do you think that ULA isn't? Competition and different approaches are a good thing. From a strategic perspective, the United States Government needs to maintain launch capabilities for its own payloads. It's better to have multiple options for those launches.
why do millenials need an app to measure fitness? just lift a weight and run some, maybe play a sport
I'm no millenial, but the damned little thing provides me with just enough motivation to get up off my ass and go for a walk. I have a few other people that I "compete with" but it's mostly just about actually that little prompt to actually move around. I know that the times my fitbit has broken, I've slacked off.
So local cathedral in Vancouver just underwent a major restoration where they replaced the roof. The church is located on one of the busiest intersection sin the city. As they did their work, and removed the old roof, they ran into the unanticipated problem of significant amounts of lead dust filtering down into the rest of the building. It was then that it dawned on them that the church had been sitting on the busiest intersection in the city for 100 years, and for a significant portion of those, vehicles had used leaded gasoline. The remediation of the lead added about 25% to the cost of the renovation.
As bad as Uber drivers may be, Taxi drivers are no better. At least around here, they're probably the worst, most poorly behaved drivers on the road. I took a cab home from the airport, a while back, and the idiot was speeding up the curb lane, speeding, pushing amber lights, cutting people off, etc... and then had the gall to be pissed off when I refused to tip him (I do not reward bad behaviour... had he driven like a sane person, I would have tipped him adequately). When I'm driving myself, I basically give cabs no quarter. Where I'd slow down a hair to be courteous to another driver to let them merge... with a cab? never. They shat their bed, and now have to live with it.
IMHO, the regulations should be changed so that any car that passes the various standards (Safety, meter accuracy, insurance, etc... ) should be allowed to be a cab. The Taxi cartels need to be done away with, but also companies such as Uber need to operate in an adequate regulatory environment to preserve public safety. Rates should be regulated, and drivers should be fairly compensated. And any traffic fines should be strictly enforced, and doubled, for professional drivers.
Typical compression ratio in a Diesel engine is somewhere around 20:1, vs a gasoline engine that's running 10:1 or there about. That means that your 3.2L V6 is pushing 46500L per minute of air through it (3.6/6*20*1550*3 = 49600. Your gasoline engine is 3.2/6*10*1800*3 = 28800L/minute.
Basically this is displacement/cylinder * compression ratio * RPM * number of intake strokes per revolution. As such, your Diesel is pushing just under double the amount of air compared to the gasoline engine.
Ever wondered why diesel tail pipes are a lot larger than gasoline ones? This is why, diesels move a lot more air.
For the record, I drove an '06 TDI, and won't trade it for a gasser until it falls apart.
No, the lead was a simulator for the plutonium pit. The Depleted Uranium tamper surrounding the weapon isn't particularly radioactive. The tamper is there for two reasons, one the density and high inertia of it confines the chemical explosion long enough for the nuclear reaction to occur. Secondly, fast neutrons from the plutonium chain reaction then cause the tamper to fission, generating another portion of the weapon's energy.
As to why you're flying the aircraft with a weapon such as this, it's because it is supposed to be a live training mission, testing all the electrical interfaces, mission profiles, etc... and without the plutonium pit, the weapon is inert from a nuclear perspective. At that point, they also didn't have really viable simulators that could be used as a proxy.
Oh, so fuel prices reach what they are elsewhere in the world? most recent price I saw for regular here in Vancouver was $1.19 CAD/L, which works out to $3.40 USD/gallon, though that's a significant improvement over what it was a while back when it sat at $1.50 for quite a while.
Face it, the US has artificially low fuel prices, you guys are just starting to join the rest of the world. The world won't end, the sun will still rise and set, and the bitching will continue.
Especially when there's no fucking reason to fuel up while crew are aboard.
Actually there are a number of reasons to fuel right before launch, some specific to SpaceX/Falcon 9 and some in practice.
1) If you fuel the rocket you have a lot of people that are working in and around the rocket when it's in a hazardous state for a long period of time, with no means of escape. Think of all the technicians in the white-room who are strapping the astronauts into the capsule etc... The astronauts, when strapped into the capsule, have a good escape system that will get them away from the fireball.
2) In the old days, it did take hours to load propellant into the rocket, and having your astronauts strapped into their seats that long was lunacy. With the Falcon 9, that process is down to 40 minutes.
3) The Falcon 9 requires this. The design as it stands depends on sub-chilled propellants to achieve the required performance. This means that the rocket can't sit for long on the pad fully loaded, certainly not long enough to strap in the astronauts.
All in all, with the way that the Falcon 9 works, and the reliability of the launch escape system, it's actually safer to load the propellants when the astronauts are already packed in.
Given that they force you to buy 8 channels of dreck just to get the one channel you want, it's not surprising. One of the many reasons why I cut the cord.
and the current forestry management practice is to put them out ASAP, you're right on part of that.
Actually, modern policies are to let it burn as much as possible, and only fight it where required. In our situation, they protected our facility (we run a retreat center in a deep valley) by doing controlled burns throughout our valley. This greatly reduced the fuel load, while protecting the larger/more established trees, and saving our site. In the end, the forest will be far more healthy because of this fire.
There were some other fires, further into the back country that summer as well, and for the most part they just kept them under observation, and allowed them to follow their natural course.
A fair amount of this can probably be traced back to this. In the days of yore, the Forest Service had a policy of "Out by 11" (the next day). The reality is that just caused massive fuel buildup in the forests, and made them far more flammable than they were in the past. That said, climate change has magnified this problem and made the tinder box even more dangerous.
Reference: I spent two summers ago at the heart of the Wolverine Fire in Chelan County, WA. We watched over 1000 acres burn in 15 minutes (from 8 miles away) and it's what I imagine what a Nuclear weapon going off would look like.
Or, you know, just do like we do in Canada and cast our ballots by making a mark on a piece of paper with a pencil, and then counting them by hand, under the supervision of representatives from each of the candidates who are listed on that piece of paper. Highly accurate, highly reliable, and very scaleable.
This is bad, really bad. It's not just the firewalls that are at issue, but it's also all their routers, if they're running most modern versions of IOS and/or IOS-XE.
The only thing to do right now is to slam ACLs onto your interfaces to block connections to UDP port 500 and 4500 from anywhere except where the other end of your VPN is coming from.
the ordinary mousetrap is humane, effective, reusable, and available in multiple sizes. They kill instantly; you'll never find a mousetrap with a live rodent wiggling around in it.
Not true, in my years of dealing with mice out at the cabin, I've managed to trap one mouse in two traps (it got it's rear end caught in one, and head in the other), and have found more than one trap where the mouse was maimed, but still alive (usually when they trip it with their rear ends).
It all depends on what branch of religion you're talking about. Most of the christians I know personally in the US found Bernie Sanders to be too conservative for them.
Unfortunately, HP learned from their success, and has chosen to make their printers shitty since then so to force regular upgrades. I kinda wish that I hadn't given up my old 4simx, but when I moved into a 526 square foot apartment, I didn't want my printer taking up half my floor space. That thing was built like a tank.
If there were say 7 or more realistic ISP choices per typical customer, THEN competition could work its magic, Adam-Smith-style.
Call me a raging socialist, but what I would rather have is municipal/PUD fiber run to the homes, and then be able to select the service provider that uses the publicly owned infrastructure. This works very well in Chelan and Douglas counties in WA. The PUDs there run the fiber, and look after the physical plant, and then the residents of the counties can buy service from any one of several different ISP and TV providers. Additionally, if you're a commercial setup, you can get transit from Level 3 and/or Zayo.
It's really the best of both worlds, a lot of competition for service, and very reasonable rates for the physical plant.
I loved the book The Martian, which has a lot of technology in it (the movie was a bit dumbed down compared to the book, but not entirely).
My only problem with "The Martian" is that the premise for him being marooned on Mars (at least in the film) is completely bogus. Mars has 1% of the atmospheric pressure of earth, there's absolutely no way that a dust storm could cause anything like the effects it had in the movie. It certainly could not lift rocks, never mind knocking over a rocket.
It's trickier than that. They were loading LOX. There was no RP1 in the upper stage yet. So why did the LOX explode?
Do you have a source for that? Typically the RP-1 is loaded first as even though it's chilled, it's far more thermally stable than the super-chilled LOX. The LOX is loaded into the tanks just before launch so that it doesn't have time to warm up before the rocket is ignited.
From the US Launch Report video, it's also pretty clear that the RP-1 was already in both stages when the anomaly occurred. In a deflagration like that, it burns with big movie-style orange flames, and that's exactly what we saw from both the upper stage, and the lower stage as the rocket came apart.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, when CRS-7 failed, it did destroy a reasonably valuable piece, the International Docking Adapter A.
Interestingly, the Dragon would most likely have survived (and will now in the case of a similar failure) had the software been setup to deploy the parachutes in case of a breakup like that. Unfortunately, the IDA was in the trunk, which wouldn't have been saved by the parachutes.
I don't normally reply to ACs, but the fuel cost is roughly negligible. The propellants used for landing are mostly the contingency propellants they woudl need to cary any way in case of a problem with one or more engines. As far as refurbishment costs go, we'll see, but the second landed booster has had at least 10 full duration test firings since landing, without anything going boom, and minimal refurbishment.
And finally, ok, so SpaceX is getting government funds. Do you think that ULA isn't? Competition and different approaches are a good thing. From a strategic perspective, the United States Government needs to maintain launch capabilities for its own payloads. It's better to have multiple options for those launches.
why do millenials need an app to measure fitness? just lift a weight and run some, maybe play a sport
I'm no millenial, but the damned little thing provides me with just enough motivation to get up off my ass and go for a walk. I have a few other people that I "compete with" but it's mostly just about actually that little prompt to actually move around. I know that the times my fitbit has broken, I've slacked off.
So local cathedral in Vancouver just underwent a major restoration where they replaced the roof. The church is located on one of the busiest intersection sin the city. As they did their work, and removed the old roof, they ran into the unanticipated problem of significant amounts of lead dust filtering down into the rest of the building. It was then that it dawned on them that the church had been sitting on the busiest intersection in the city for 100 years, and for a significant portion of those, vehicles had used leaded gasoline. The remediation of the lead added about 25% to the cost of the renovation.
Odd, I have more 19V power bricks than I can shake a stick at. The Thinkpads, Toughbooks, etc... all have 19V supplies.
As bad as Uber drivers may be, Taxi drivers are no better. At least around here, they're probably the worst, most poorly behaved drivers on the road. I took a cab home from the airport, a while back, and the idiot was speeding up the curb lane, speeding, pushing amber lights, cutting people off, etc... and then had the gall to be pissed off when I refused to tip him (I do not reward bad behaviour... had he driven like a sane person, I would have tipped him adequately). When I'm driving myself, I basically give cabs no quarter. Where I'd slow down a hair to be courteous to another driver to let them merge... with a cab? never. They shat their bed, and now have to live with it.
IMHO, the regulations should be changed so that any car that passes the various standards (Safety, meter accuracy, insurance, etc... ) should be allowed to be a cab. The Taxi cartels need to be done away with, but also companies such as Uber need to operate in an adequate regulatory environment to preserve public safety. Rates should be regulated, and drivers should be fairly compensated. And any traffic fines should be strictly enforced, and doubled, for professional drivers.
You're absolutely right, i can't believe I brain farted like that... I facepalmed about 10 minutes after I posted. Sorry for the stupidity.
Typical compression ratio in a Diesel engine is somewhere around 20:1, vs a gasoline engine that's running 10:1 or there about. That means that your 3.2L V6 is pushing 46500L per minute of air through it (3.6/6*20*1550*3 = 49600. Your gasoline engine is 3.2/6*10*1800*3 = 28800L/minute.
Basically this is displacement/cylinder * compression ratio * RPM * number of intake strokes per revolution. As such, your Diesel is pushing just under double the amount of air compared to the gasoline engine.
Ever wondered why diesel tail pipes are a lot larger than gasoline ones? This is why, diesels move a lot more air.
For the record, I drove an '06 TDI, and won't trade it for a gasser until it falls apart.
It's ok if the results are printed using Kryten's butt printer... then you're really pulling it out of someone's ass.
No, the lead was a simulator for the plutonium pit. The Depleted Uranium tamper surrounding the weapon isn't particularly radioactive. The tamper is there for two reasons, one the density and high inertia of it confines the chemical explosion long enough for the nuclear reaction to occur. Secondly, fast neutrons from the plutonium chain reaction then cause the tamper to fission, generating another portion of the weapon's energy.
As to why you're flying the aircraft with a weapon such as this, it's because it is supposed to be a live training mission, testing all the electrical interfaces, mission profiles, etc... and without the plutonium pit, the weapon is inert from a nuclear perspective. At that point, they also didn't have really viable simulators that could be used as a proxy.
Oh, so fuel prices reach what they are elsewhere in the world? most recent price I saw for regular here in Vancouver was $1.19 CAD/L, which works out to $3.40 USD/gallon, though that's a significant improvement over what it was a while back when it sat at $1.50 for quite a while.
Face it, the US has artificially low fuel prices, you guys are just starting to join the rest of the world. The world won't end, the sun will still rise and set, and the bitching will continue.
Especially when there's no fucking reason to fuel up while crew are aboard.
Actually there are a number of reasons to fuel right before launch, some specific to SpaceX/Falcon 9 and some in practice.
1) If you fuel the rocket you have a lot of people that are working in and around the rocket when it's in a hazardous state for a long period of time, with no means of escape. Think of all the technicians in the white-room who are strapping the astronauts into the capsule etc... The astronauts, when strapped into the capsule, have a good escape system that will get them away from the fireball.
2) In the old days, it did take hours to load propellant into the rocket, and having your astronauts strapped into their seats that long was lunacy. With the Falcon 9, that process is down to 40 minutes.
3) The Falcon 9 requires this. The design as it stands depends on sub-chilled propellants to achieve the required performance. This means that the rocket can't sit for long on the pad fully loaded, certainly not long enough to strap in the astronauts.
All in all, with the way that the Falcon 9 works, and the reliability of the launch escape system, it's actually safer to load the propellants when the astronauts are already packed in.
And hence why people are only watching 10% of the channels they're paying for.
Given that they force you to buy 8 channels of dreck just to get the one channel you want, it's not surprising. One of the many reasons why I cut the cord.
and the current forestry management practice is to put them out ASAP, you're right on part of that.
Actually, modern policies are to let it burn as much as possible, and only fight it where required. In our situation, they protected our facility (we run a retreat center in a deep valley) by doing controlled burns throughout our valley. This greatly reduced the fuel load, while protecting the larger/more established trees, and saving our site. In the end, the forest will be far more healthy because of this fire.
There were some other fires, further into the back country that summer as well, and for the most part they just kept them under observation, and allowed them to follow their natural course.
A fair amount of this can probably be traced back to this. In the days of yore, the Forest Service had a policy of "Out by 11" (the next day). The reality is that just caused massive fuel buildup in the forests, and made them far more flammable than they were in the past. That said, climate change has magnified this problem and made the tinder box even more dangerous.
Reference: I spent two summers ago at the heart of the Wolverine Fire in Chelan County, WA. We watched over 1000 acres burn in 15 minutes (from 8 miles away) and it's what I imagine what a Nuclear weapon going off would look like.
Or, you know, just do like we do in Canada and cast our ballots by making a mark on a piece of paper with a pencil, and then counting them by hand, under the supervision of representatives from each of the candidates who are listed on that piece of paper. Highly accurate, highly reliable, and very scaleable.
This is bad, really bad. It's not just the firewalls that are at issue, but it's also all their routers, if they're running most modern versions of IOS and/or IOS-XE.
The only thing to do right now is to slam ACLs onto your interfaces to block connections to UDP port 500 and 4500 from anywhere except where the other end of your VPN is coming from.
the ordinary mousetrap is humane, effective, reusable, and available in multiple sizes. They kill instantly; you'll never find a mousetrap with a live rodent wiggling around in it.
Not true, in my years of dealing with mice out at the cabin, I've managed to trap one mouse in two traps (it got it's rear end caught in one, and head in the other), and have found more than one trap where the mouse was maimed, but still alive (usually when they trip it with their rear ends).
It all depends on what branch of religion you're talking about. Most of the christians I know personally in the US found Bernie Sanders to be too conservative for them.
Unfortunately, HP learned from their success, and has chosen to make their printers shitty since then so to force regular upgrades. I kinda wish that I hadn't given up my old 4simx, but when I moved into a 526 square foot apartment, I didn't want my printer taking up half my floor space. That thing was built like a tank.
If there were say 7 or more realistic ISP choices per typical customer, THEN competition could work its magic, Adam-Smith-style.
Call me a raging socialist, but what I would rather have is municipal/PUD fiber run to the homes, and then be able to select the service provider that uses the publicly owned infrastructure. This works very well in Chelan and Douglas counties in WA. The PUDs there run the fiber, and look after the physical plant, and then the residents of the counties can buy service from any one of several different ISP and TV providers. Additionally, if you're a commercial setup, you can get transit from Level 3 and/or Zayo.
It's really the best of both worlds, a lot of competition for service, and very reasonable rates for the physical plant.
I'd also add "The Expanse" to this list, both the TV Series and the novel series, and don't forget the new Battlestar Galactica.
I loved the book The Martian, which has a lot of technology in it (the movie was a bit dumbed down compared to the book, but not entirely).
My only problem with "The Martian" is that the premise for him being marooned on Mars (at least in the film) is completely bogus. Mars has 1% of the atmospheric pressure of earth, there's absolutely no way that a dust storm could cause anything like the effects it had in the movie. It certainly could not lift rocks, never mind knocking over a rocket.
It's trickier than that. They were loading LOX. There was no RP1 in the upper stage yet. So why did the LOX explode?
Do you have a source for that? Typically the RP-1 is loaded first as even though it's chilled, it's far more thermally stable than the super-chilled LOX. The LOX is loaded into the tanks just before launch so that it doesn't have time to warm up before the rocket is ignited.
From the US Launch Report video, it's also pretty clear that the RP-1 was already in both stages when the anomaly occurred. In a deflagration like that, it burns with big movie-style orange flames, and that's exactly what we saw from both the upper stage, and the lower stage as the rocket came apart.