contact the credit bureaus - there's 3 major ones - Equifax, Trans Union and Experian. tell them what happened, they can flag your acct so you have to contacted at your home phone before any acct is opened in your name. Here's more info...
That reminds me, as I'm sure Fig is aware, of one of HP's strategies they employed a few years back(and still may).
2 printers, identical in features, slightly different in appearance.
The one for $150 took full cartidges (~$30 each). The other at $120 could only be restocked with the half-full cartridges (~$27 each).
Not something Joe User would (could?) notice easily. He'd get screwed each time he bought a cartridge. That screwage factor depended on how many times he had to refill before the printer had to be replaced.
Do you know why the research hours are so low? Because the station crew is limited to 3 persons. Had funding not been cut for the X-38, the station would have the capability of supporting a crew of 7.
Next time do your homework . . . or at least change your subject line.
So let's face it, NASA is unable to do real space exploration...
It must be true. I read it on slashdot.
Maybe we could go back to the days of digging thru a box full of rebate pads to try to find the one the matches your product, 'cept this time it's a pad of EULAs.
It's just too bad that software is a such a different animal that the retail industry knows of no other way to deal with dissatisfaction with a product other than to ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist.
It always made me wonder, though, back in the day of the Sega Genesis when the retailers really started cracking down on not allowing returns with open media - how many people were actually dumping the ROMs from the Sega cartridges? And once they got them on the PC, what did they do - create their own cartridge? I remember not being allowed to return Vectorman - pirating a copy seemed more trouble than it was worth.
...nearly empty...may have been...doesn't seem likely...
In a world of CYA due to lawsuits over you-name-it, why should this be questioned? Exercising on the side of caution is the nature of business today - especially at NASA. There's probably a good bit of bad PR yet to come out of the tragedy, a dozen people getting sick because no one said it was dangerous to collect the debris won't help matters.
Typically, a deorbit burn is designed to get the required delta-V to send the shuttle back down, but also to move the CG of the vehicle if needed (by burning more prop). Though this mission had MANY maneuvers (ie, lots of prop, so probably smaller margins, so not much left at end of mission), 500 lbs of prop is a lot. Hard to tell what gets lodged in which crevice, makes it to the ground, and oozes onto what.
A lot of structural stuff fell, but don't underestimate the significance of all the other stuff, nor its likelihood of burning up. Afterall, they found a mission patch.
I agree, picking up the debris was probably safe, but warning people about touching it served two real purposes.
Flying higher inclinations require more propellant since you are using less of the Earth's momentum to put you up. More prop = less payload. Sure, it's a tradeoff, but this was the 1st in 113 flights that had a reentry problem.
There's a lot of hindsight now, and no one knows how this is going to turn out - maybe (probably?) we'll find there was no way of knowing ahead of time that this was going to happen. At that point, safety rendezvous access is moot.
It takes ~400 fps to change your inclination 1 deg. STS-107 flew at 39 deg, ISS flies at 51.6 deg. It's a propellant issue (read: impossible for the given mission).
Afterwards you have a shuttle in a slowly degrading orbit that's going to do an uncontrolled burn up in the atmosphere -- although perhaps you can set a navigation program to activate after the crew is saved to ensure splashdown in a safe area (like the Pacific ocean).
Actually, the shuttle usually completes the entire reentry automatically. The pilot and cmdr typically fly the HAC and the actual landing, though they don't have to.
But had it been known there was a problem (whether or not the crew was transferred), Nasa would have chosen a landing opportunity that would be mostly over water, ie, if they were still planning on KSC, they'd choose an opp that went northeast thru the Gulf of Mexico to minimize the amount of land they flew over. That way, if the shuttle did end up making it, the vehicle wouldn't be scrapped.
As an aside, there appears to be very little utility to micro-G experiments.
The difference is the removal of the distored effect of gravity. It helps us better understand thousands of physical phenomena. Why is that of little utility?
Yeah, who'd have thought that it would only take 23 years and 113 missions for it to happen? Sorry, prophetic is when it happens in the first couple missions.
We really have been dicking around, doing nothing, for the past 2 decades.
Thanks for your opinion, but did you really even know there was a shuttle flying last Saturday before you saw it on the news? Bonus points: name 3 experiments that were onboard STS-107.
Moral of the story: Don't say we have been doing anything if you don't know what we've been doing.
Maybe before offering your opinion on the future of manned space flight, you should at least be aware of the state of it. I suggest you start by learning that what OV-105 is.
I think also that the Columbia is too heavy to make the higher orbit of the ISS, and OMS and RCS thrusters would not have been enough to boost it to that level. The Columbia is heavier because it was overbuilt... the later shuttles are much lighter. This is why the Columbia has *never* gone to the ISS.
Heavier, yes, incapable of reaching ISS, no. This flight had a ton of on-orbit maneuvers, so a lot of fuel. However, the biggest obstacle to reaching the ISS is the difference in inclinations. Out of plane burns, which would be required to change the inclination, are very expensive from a propellant point of view. Actually for deorbit burns, if there is a lot of prop left, the burn will be done with an out of plane component. Given the same inclination, and by jettisoning the payloads, my money says you could've reached the ISS (provided they weren't completely out of phase on their orbits, ie, opposite sides of the earth).
The Shuttle is designed to reenter at a particular angle (plus or minus some), and can survive no other trajectory or angle.
Mostly true, not completely true. Optimal entry angles range from about 1/2 deg to 3 deg below the horizontal, and the shuttle enters at wings level, nose pitched 40 deg up. However, there are contingency plans for a Recovery Prebank. This is used in the event that the OMS engines (used to slow the orbiter down to begin the decent) stop prematurely, which would mean you're coming in more shallow. This would result in the orbiter "skipping" off the atmosphere, so you've missed your landing opportunity and you're in a big panic to try and find a way to land since you'll come back in a few minutes after the skip. By rolling the orbiter into bank, you reduce the drag, and essentially cause the orbiter to slice into the atmosphere so it doesn't skip.
jetison the science module whilst on orbit
This could probably have been done. I'm not sure if they had latches that could be remotely unlatched, but provided they could, opening the payload bay doors and maneuvering the shuttle away from the payload would allow the entry weight to be reduced. Had the wing situation been diagnosed as more severe, this scenario may have been excercised.
Actually, what might be really fun is to do something similar to what the talk radio show hosts will do to mess with someone who hasn't turned their radio down - and it'd be a nice little geek project to boot!
(telephone line) and (speaker out + delay) -> (modem line in)
Once you have a telemarketer on, pick up the line on your computer and talk over the mic, which happens to be delaying everything said for, say, 7 seconds and feeding it back into the conversation. After 14 seconds, there's three simulataneous conversations going on. Just make sure you say "hello?" a lot to get them really confused trying to answer all the echoes.
How about "that car is owned by a white person" listing getting your black roomate killed for borrowing your car?
Cops are trained to kill black people, thanks for helping get the word out.
PS. Any of you that have the tollway ID chip so you don't have to stop on the toll road automatically have to be quiet. Sure, those only track you while on the tollway, but who's to say there's not an evil gov'mt plot already in place to install sensors around town to see where else you go? Those read at 20 yards, RFID is at 20 inches.
Third, searches through public databases take time. It's not like they'll be able to identify you the moment their computer gets a lock on your identifying characteristic. Local caching would be prohibitively expensive for your average police department, no matter what the size of the city.
You're new here, aren't you? Wireless connectivity. Learn it, love it. Cop cars commonly have terminals in them so they can key in license plate numbers w/o having to talk to dispatch. You are right though: searches do take time...usually measured in microseconds. A friend of mine, who just happens to be a sheriff mind you, says that's what he does when he's in his patrol car waiting at a red light. Keeps keying them in till he finds stolen, outstanding warrant, expired registration, etc.
And by the way, I've been following you to work for 3 weeks now.
You don't have a problem with spam? So no one should have a problem, right? Spam does not depend solely on you doing something stupid. Any mail you send to someone could be improperly fwd'd or even posted somewhere that you don't want it to be. From there, you're screwed.
RTFPSTTD - Read The F'n Parent Story To This Duplicate. Or perhaps the link. Summary: the best way to reformat is random 1's and 0's at least 7 times. Just writing 0's once does not make the data unrecoverable.
Slashdot Mirror
my confidence about their investigation on why the shuttle exploded begins to wane
Mine too. Especially since it didn't explode. heating and dynamic pressure --> vehicle breakup
contact the credit bureaus - there's 3 major ones - Equifax, Trans Union and Experian. tell them what happened, they can flag your acct so you have to contacted at your home phone before any acct is opened in your name. Here's more info...
That reminds me, as I'm sure Fig is aware, of one of HP's strategies they employed a few years back(and still may).
2 printers, identical in features, slightly different in appearance.
The one for $150 took full cartidges (~$30 each).
The other at $120 could only be restocked with the half-full cartridges (~$27 each).
Not something Joe User would (could?) notice easily. He'd get screwed each time he bought a cartridge. That screwage factor depended on how many times he had to refill before the printer had to be replaced.
Do you know why the research hours are so low? Because the station crew is limited to 3 persons. Had funding not been cut for the X-38, the station would have the capability of supporting a crew of 7.
Next time do your homework . . . or at least change your subject line.
So let's face it, NASA is unable to do real space exploration...
It must be true. I read it on slashdot.
Maybe we could go back to the days of digging thru a box full of rebate pads to try to find the one the matches your product, 'cept this time it's a pad of EULAs.
It's just too bad that software is a such a different animal that the retail industry knows of no other way to deal with dissatisfaction with a product other than to ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist.
It always made me wonder, though, back in the day of the Sega Genesis when the retailers really started cracking down on not allowing returns with open media - how many people were actually dumping the ROMs from the Sega cartridges? And once they got them on the PC, what did they do - create their own cartridge? I remember not being allowed to return Vectorman - pirating a copy seemed more trouble than it was worth.
...nearly empty...may have been...doesn't seem likely...
In a world of CYA due to lawsuits over you-name-it, why should this be questioned? Exercising on the side of caution is the nature of business today - especially at NASA. There's probably a good bit of bad PR yet to come out of the tragedy, a dozen people getting sick because no one said it was dangerous to collect the debris won't help matters.
Typically, a deorbit burn is designed to get the required delta-V to send the shuttle back down, but also to move the CG of the vehicle if needed (by burning more prop). Though this mission had MANY maneuvers (ie, lots of prop, so probably smaller margins, so not much left at end of mission), 500 lbs of prop is a lot. Hard to tell what gets lodged in which crevice, makes it to the ground, and oozes onto what.
A lot of structural stuff fell, but don't underestimate the significance of all the other stuff, nor its likelihood of burning up. Afterall, they found a mission patch.
I agree, picking up the debris was probably safe, but warning people about touching it served two real purposes.
Flying higher inclinations require more propellant since you are using less of the Earth's momentum to put you up. More prop = less payload. Sure, it's a tradeoff, but this was the 1st in 113 flights that had a reentry problem.
There's a lot of hindsight now, and no one knows how this is going to turn out - maybe (probably?) we'll find there was no way of knowing ahead of time that this was going to happen. At that point, safety rendezvous access is moot.
It takes ~400 fps to change your inclination 1 deg. STS-107 flew at 39 deg, ISS flies at 51.6 deg. It's a propellant issue (read: impossible for the given mission).
Afterwards you have a shuttle in a slowly degrading orbit that's going to do an uncontrolled burn up in the atmosphere -- although perhaps you can set a navigation program to activate after the crew is saved to ensure splashdown in a safe area (like the Pacific ocean).
Actually, the shuttle usually completes the entire reentry automatically. The pilot and cmdr typically fly the HAC and the actual landing, though they don't have to.
But had it been known there was a problem (whether or not the crew was transferred), Nasa would have chosen a landing opportunity that would be mostly over water, ie, if they were still planning on KSC, they'd choose an opp that went northeast thru the Gulf of Mexico to minimize the amount of land they flew over. That way, if the shuttle did end up making it, the vehicle wouldn't be scrapped.
I still can't believe no one got hit.
Why, yes I can.
Educate yourself on u-g and then I'll answer your second question.
As an aside, there appears to be very little utility to micro-G experiments.
The difference is the removal of the distored effect of gravity. It helps us better understand thousands of physical phenomena. Why is that of little utility?
Freakin' prophetic.
Yeah, who'd have thought that it would only take 23 years and 113 missions for it to happen? Sorry, prophetic is when it happens in the first couple missions.
We really have been dicking around, doing nothing, for the past 2 decades.
Thanks for your opinion, but did you really even know there was a shuttle flying last Saturday before you saw it on the news? Bonus points: name 3 experiments that were onboard STS-107.
Moral of the story: Don't say we have been doing anything if you don't know what we've been doing.
Maybe before offering your opinion on the future of manned space flight, you should at least be aware of the state of it. I suggest you start by learning that what OV-105 is.
FYI, the space station is in a very difficult orbit for NASA shuttles to hit.
How so? Shuttle gets there, stays for a few days, even has enough prop to boost the orbit. It ain't child's play, but it has gotten there every time.
I think also that the Columbia is too heavy to make the higher orbit of the ISS, and OMS and RCS thrusters would not have been enough to boost it to that level. The Columbia is heavier because it was overbuilt... the later shuttles are much lighter. This is why the Columbia has *never* gone to the ISS.
Heavier, yes, incapable of reaching ISS, no. This flight had a ton of on-orbit maneuvers, so a lot of fuel. However, the biggest obstacle to reaching the ISS is the difference in inclinations. Out of plane burns, which would be required to change the inclination, are very expensive from a propellant point of view. Actually for deorbit burns, if there is a lot of prop left, the burn will be done with an out of plane component. Given the same inclination, and by jettisoning the payloads, my money says you could've reached the ISS (provided they weren't completely out of phase on their orbits, ie, opposite sides of the earth).
The Shuttle is designed to reenter at a particular angle (plus or minus some), and can survive no other trajectory or angle.
Mostly true, not completely true. Optimal entry angles range from about 1/2 deg to 3 deg below the horizontal, and the shuttle enters at wings level, nose pitched 40 deg up. However, there are contingency plans for a Recovery Prebank. This is used in the event that the OMS engines (used to slow the orbiter down to begin the decent) stop prematurely, which would mean you're coming in more shallow. This would result in the orbiter "skipping" off the atmosphere, so you've missed your landing opportunity and you're in a big panic to try and find a way to land since you'll come back in a few minutes after the skip. By rolling the orbiter into bank, you reduce the drag, and essentially cause the orbiter to slice into the atmosphere so it doesn't skip.
jetison the science module whilst on orbit
This could probably have been done. I'm not sure if they had latches that could be remotely unlatched, but provided they could, opening the payload bay doors and maneuvering the shuttle away from the payload would allow the entry weight to be reduced. Had the wing situation been diagnosed as more severe, this scenario may have been excercised.
Actually, what might be really fun is to do something similar to what the talk radio show hosts will do to mess with someone who hasn't turned their radio down - and it'd be a nice little geek project to boot!
(telephone line) and (speaker out + delay) -> (modem line in)
Once you have a telemarketer on, pick up the line on your computer and talk over the mic, which happens to be delaying everything said for, say, 7 seconds and feeding it back into the conversation. After 14 seconds, there's three simulataneous conversations going on. Just make sure you say "hello?" a lot to get them really confused trying to answer all the echoes.
Have you seen the entire Terry Tate video? Not only funny, but an Office Space quote too.
you'll kill the drive pretty fast
Better hurry up and tell apple, creative, and archos. They've got a lot of money riding on this.
How about "that car is owned by a white person" listing getting your black roomate killed for borrowing your car?
Cops are trained to kill black people, thanks for helping get the word out.
PS. Any of you that have the tollway ID chip so you don't have to stop on the toll road automatically have to be quiet. Sure, those only track you while on the tollway, but who's to say there's not an evil gov'mt plot already in place to install sensors around town to see where else you go? Those read at 20 yards, RFID is at 20 inches.
It's the work of 2 minutes to swap plates ... harder to swap out tires
Every watch Nascar?
most people keep the same set for years
And most people keep the same license plates even longer.
Third, searches through public databases take time. It's not like they'll be able to identify you the moment their computer gets a lock on your identifying characteristic. Local caching would be prohibitively expensive for your average police department, no matter what the size of the city.
You're new here, aren't you? Wireless connectivity. Learn it, love it. Cop cars commonly have terminals in them so they can key in license plate numbers w/o having to talk to dispatch. You are right though: searches do take time...usually measured in microseconds. A friend of mine, who just happens to be a sheriff mind you, says that's what he does when he's in his patrol car waiting at a red light. Keeps keying them in till he finds stolen, outstanding warrant, expired registration, etc.
And by the way, I've been following you to work for 3 weeks now.
You don't have a problem with spam? So no one should have a problem, right? Spam does not depend solely on you doing something stupid. Any mail you send to someone could be improperly fwd'd or even posted somewhere that you don't want it to be. From there, you're screwed.
Damn AC.
RTFPSTTD - Read The F'n Parent Story To This Duplicate. Or perhaps the link. Summary: the best way to reformat is random 1's and 0's at least 7 times. Just writing 0's once does not make the data unrecoverable.