Can't you stall? What about extreme high angle of attack situations? I've never been on these and I don't know the physics of it (I'm quite familiar with classic aircraft design and calculations). If they are so great, why no medium scale implementation exists? The only ones I saw were the small, lightweight implementations.
Airspace is quite controlled as well, at least in Europe. Where you can fly is pretty regulated. There are volumes of space left for small aircraft but still you are pretty limited (as the roads are).
The nice thing is given a separation distance, air traffic can still hold enormous volumes.
On the other hand while driving on the ground I only have to live two seconds worth of distance as a minimum between my car and the guy in front of me. On air, this distance is much much longer. The traffic might be still pretty bad.
On the other hand, what can I expect from a country where only 40 years ago a significant amount of their population weren't allowed to sit anywhere they liked on a bus. It's a "White Man's America". And this is from the most mongrel nation on earth.
There is a difference but not that much. You must be confusing yourself with Apollo era propoganda. The delta V to get to the moon and back is much higher than your sub-orbital and orbital flights. Also there is a smaller mass to deccelerate hence less energy turned into heat. Pieces of rock survive derobital speeds and temperatures easily and they are much much faster compared to your average tin can spaceship returning back to earth.
The reason they have to examine&replace bits of Shuttles everythime is because of the fragility of the tiles. If they used 60's style heat shields that wouldn't be a problem (or much higher technology like X-15).
Lift generated by a rotating body vs. lift generated by a rotating body generating turbulance. Interestingly enough turbulence helps. In high speeds laminar flows are not that good, in many aircraft sharp edges and slits on the wing are used to generate turbulance so that the shock wave won't be happening on the wing surface itself. It is not very good for lift. (When the aircraft is flying around 0.9M, the air flowing over the wing can move faster than sound).
You need a lesson supply and demand. Price goes up when there is demand, price goes down when there is supply. If a lot of people are selling, the price goes down. It's not the other way around (prices goes down, then people sell).
Simply people decided that they would make a nice sum and started selling. The idiots who want to buy are not that many (at least less than the sellers) so they can get it for less than what the seller wants to sell. It works better with a lot of people trading at the same time and the buyer can choose between different sellers, each seller can offer for something a little bit cheaper, cutting from their gain but then they can sell more and make more money out of it. Or something like that. I hate real money. What's wrong with Monopoly money?
Re:Let's just get this out of the way...
on
More on Global Dimming
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Well, let's put it this way:
On Venus, it is around 400C degrees. On Venus, you can't see the sun because of the clouds.
Now, if we removed the clouds, would Venus get warmer or colder?
I suppose when your head is on the block, any excuse is good enough... Training on Geneva Convention? Baah... Fetch me the comfy chair! Cardinal! Fetch the cushions!
If you were a neocon, you would think of the world in black and white
Wow... I never thought being an idiot is a requirement to become a neocon. Are they all like this: Naive and quite idiotic? As far as I can hear on BBC radio, Rumsfeld has definitely a low two digit IQ. I hoped at least people holding Bush's leash were intelligent.
I don't think I've really seen much animation work at all that manages to dramatically explore the potential of the medium like that.
I advise to investigate some Japanese stuff, for example Cowboy Bebop. You'll be suprised how they managed to dramatically explore the potential of the medium, just like that.
Well... Wait until RedHat runs out of money or some jackass gets the helm. No one thought Caldera would do what it is doing now four years ago. Hindsight is always 20/20.:(
With Java JDK 1.3 and 1.4, I experienced many unexplainable hangups. The same software works fine with Suse or Redhat 9. I didn't investigate deeply because problem was sporadoic and repeatability was very low but it, one way or the other, always happened. It's fine for desktop, I still use it but not on anything I'm doing Java work.
Blame Sun if you like, it works with other distros.
That's a good point. I have servers running Redhat 7 to 9, in production for intraweb or other services within the group/team. I really don't have to bother about malicious attacks although I try to keep my patches up to date.
Now Redhat is trying to move me to enterprise products. The whole point of installing Redhat on these boxes were to save money over the license (plus even Redhat 7 is much more secure and better engineered than NT4! (which was the previous platform for services).
But I want to keep my costs down. FC1 (although worked fine on my desktops) just simply wasn't stable enough. I couldn't wait for FC2 and the pressure to move to Suse was getting unbearable. Now I have a mixture of Suse 8, 8.1, 8.2, 9 and 8 SLES boxen and I am re-installing the Redhat boxes one by one when I have some time. Will those be supported for longer? I don't know but simply I can't sell Redhat/FC series to my boss anymore. At home I have a range of boxes running Suse 8, 8.1, 8.2, 9 and 9.1 when it becomes available publicly, I have FC1 and FC2 test 3, I have a win2k box and a Solaris 10 box. Which one of these I like better? Apart from win2k rubbish, they are all the same. I like the look and ease of use-features of FC1, it is a brilliant desktop system. Suse boxen are running all sorts of things, they are all headless, accessed over the net. Solaris 10 box is running Apache Tomcat so that's ticking like a clock.
Since Redhat split into two, I can't guarantee that any thing I tried on FC1 will work on REL, previously I was a little bit more comfortable with them. I like the idea of FC, putting the distro where it belongs, among the people who like it and want to improve it.
Are you talking about "support" in the sense of somewhere to call/write when you get stuck or support in the sense of "it doesn't work on that version actually"?
Take Oracle: They only support some distros, all commercial, enterprise level stuff. On the other hand you can get it working on almost anything, Slackware to Mandrake, some with minor problems, some with more tinkering.
Did they? Probably they did. My info comes from the times when Northrop was actually trying to sell the F-20 to europe and third world countries so it is neither uptodate nor fresh in my memory.:-)
I suppose all the crase is these new drones. It's just not the same.:(
F-16 can make 9g, surely that's better than F-4's capability (8g). I don't know how agile F-5 is unfortunately. A quick google said +7.33 which is not bad. Apparently F-4's limit can be stretched and some pilots did 10g. Surely that would exceed the airframe limits but hey..:-)
I can tell the difference between A/B and E/F because I had airfix models of them when I was a kid. Ditto for T-38 as well. Compared to E/F, A/B are quite small and fragile looking.
When they were conceived, they were called "Freedom Fighter" because the idea was countries in Europe would buy them in huge quantities (they were cheap compared to other US-made aircrafts) and used against a Soviet invasion.
It is hypersonic but not that fast (won't do Mach 2). It can carry weapons but not that much. It's range is not that long unless you put wing-tip tanks and belly tanks but then you won't be able to carry much around. I think they were made against Mig-17 which was cheap and built all around the communist countries (or was it Mig-21 but that was a Mach 2 aircraft).
To my knowledge T-38 hasn't been replaced by anything else yet. British use Hawk instead of T-38 and they still build and sell it to other countries. It is a known fact that conversion from a trainer to a full-size fighter is quite trivial so a lot of poor countries buy it in bulk.
To be fair I no longer follow the aviation industry closely, I've stuck with old aircraft, I'm not interested with all these drones US and Israel producing. It ruins the idea of flying.
F-20 has a different (single) engine. That's a regular F-5E. I don't think they fly F-5A or C's any more. I didn't know US Air Force/Navy flew F-5 variants. I thought they were abandoned ages ago. F-5 was very popular with countries in Europe and third world because it was good enough for many things and quite cheap to buy and run. Many air forces have retired their F-5's but still a couple of display groups use them (Swiss and Turkish air forces display teams for example).
Now if I can remember my heat transfer lectures, boiling is pretty good at moving energy. What you don't want to do is having the bubbles stick to the surface. Usually you get rid of this problem with a gentle forced convection. The fluid pump should generate enough flow. In most cases a gas bubble generated by boiling is no worse than a typical solid-gas interface heat transfer. Convection will improve the matters in all cases.
Also I believe the gpp is comparing apples with oranges. When you boil your kettle, these bubbles occur all the time but still the temperature of the heating element stays same until amount of cavity increases incredibly and the element heats up, the circuit gets open again. Kettles only have natural convection which is not enough to sustain the steady heat transfer between the fluid and the heating element.
If the fluid is dielectric, just immerse the PC completely into it. You don't need a sealsed case, just a tub with cables going in and out. Btw, forget about moving parts, (CD-ROM/floppy). The fluid friction will be far too much. As long as you move the fluid around... It would make a nice aquarium job...
Slashdot Mirror
Can't you stall? What about extreme high angle of attack situations? I've never been on these and I don't know the physics of it (I'm quite familiar with classic aircraft design and calculations). If they are so great, why no medium scale implementation exists? The only ones I saw were the small, lightweight implementations.
The nice thing is given a separation distance, air traffic can still hold enormous volumes.
On the other hand while driving on the ground I only have to live two seconds worth of distance as a minimum between my car and the guy in front of me. On air, this distance is much much longer. The traffic might be still pretty bad.
Uniforms? Oh that's so thirties... Every one had an uniform.
On the other hand, what can I expect from a country where only 40 years ago a significant amount of their population weren't allowed to sit anywhere they liked on a bus. It's a "White Man's America". And this is from the most mongrel nation on earth.
The reason they have to examine&replace bits of Shuttles everythime is because of the fragility of the tiles. If they used 60's style heat shields that wouldn't be a problem (or much higher technology like X-15).
You must be flying with a C-5...
Lift generated by a rotating body vs. lift generated by a rotating body generating turbulance. Interestingly enough turbulence helps. In high speeds laminar flows are not that good, in many aircraft sharp edges and slits on the wing are used to generate turbulance so that the shock wave won't be happening on the wing surface itself. It is not very good for lift. (When the aircraft is flying around 0.9M, the air flowing over the wing can move faster than sound).
Simply people decided that they would make a nice sum and started selling. The idiots who want to buy are not that many (at least less than the sellers) so they can get it for less than what the seller wants to sell. It works better with a lot of people trading at the same time and the buyer can choose between different sellers, each seller can offer for something a little bit cheaper, cutting from their gain but then they can sell more and make more money out of it. Or something like that. I hate real money. What's wrong with Monopoly money?
On Venus, it is around 400C degrees. On Venus, you can't see the sun because of the clouds.
Now, if we removed the clouds, would Venus get warmer or colder?
I suppose when your head is on the block, any excuse is good enough... Training on Geneva Convention? Baah... Fetch me the comfy chair! Cardinal! Fetch the cushions!
Wow... I never thought being an idiot is a requirement to become a neocon. Are they all like this: Naive and quite idiotic? As far as I can hear on BBC radio, Rumsfeld has definitely a low two digit IQ. I hoped at least people holding Bush's leash were intelligent.
We are doomed...
I advise to investigate some Japanese stuff, for example Cowboy Bebop. You'll be suprised how they managed to dramatically explore the potential of the medium, just like that.
Porn... What else?
Well... Wait until RedHat runs out of money or some jackass gets the helm. No one thought Caldera would do what it is doing now four years ago. Hindsight is always 20/20. :(
Blame Sun if you like, it works with other distros.
Now Redhat is trying to move me to enterprise products. The whole point of installing Redhat on these boxes were to save money over the license (plus even Redhat 7 is much more secure and better engineered than NT4! (which was the previous platform for services).
But I want to keep my costs down. FC1 (although worked fine on my desktops) just simply wasn't stable enough. I couldn't wait for FC2 and the pressure to move to Suse was getting unbearable. Now I have a mixture of Suse 8, 8.1, 8.2, 9 and 8 SLES boxen and I am re-installing the Redhat boxes one by one when I have some time. Will those be supported for longer? I don't know but simply I can't sell Redhat/FC series to my boss anymore. At home I have a range of boxes running Suse 8, 8.1, 8.2, 9 and 9.1 when it becomes available publicly, I have FC1 and FC2 test 3, I have a win2k box and a Solaris 10 box. Which one of these I like better? Apart from win2k rubbish, they are all the same. I like the look and ease of use-features of FC1, it is a brilliant desktop system. Suse boxen are running all sorts of things, they are all headless, accessed over the net. Solaris 10 box is running Apache Tomcat so that's ticking like a clock.
Since Redhat split into two, I can't guarantee that any thing I tried on FC1 will work on REL, previously I was a little bit more comfortable with them. I like the idea of FC, putting the distro where it belongs, among the people who like it and want to improve it.
Take Oracle: They only support some distros, all commercial, enterprise level stuff. On the other hand you can get it working on almost anything, Slackware to Mandrake, some with minor problems, some with more tinkering.
CTRL-H is your friend.
I suppose all the crase is these new drones. It's just not the same. :(
F-16 can make 9g, surely that's better than F-4's capability (8g). I don't know how agile F-5 is unfortunately. A quick google said +7.33 which is not bad. Apparently F-4's limit can be stretched and some pilots did 10g. Surely that would exceed the airframe limits but hey.. :-)
When they were conceived, they were called "Freedom Fighter" because the idea was countries in Europe would buy them in huge quantities (they were cheap compared to other US-made aircrafts) and used against a Soviet invasion.
It is hypersonic but not that fast (won't do Mach 2). It can carry weapons but not that much. It's range is not that long unless you put wing-tip tanks and belly tanks but then you won't be able to carry much around. I think they were made against Mig-17 which was cheap and built all around the communist countries (or was it Mig-21 but that was a Mach 2 aircraft).
To my knowledge T-38 hasn't been replaced by anything else yet. British use Hawk instead of T-38 and they still build and sell it to other countries. It is a known fact that conversion from a trainer to a full-size fighter is quite trivial so a lot of poor countries buy it in bulk.
To be fair I no longer follow the aviation industry closely, I've stuck with old aircraft, I'm not interested with all these drones US and Israel producing. It ruins the idea of flying.
F-20 has a different (single) engine. That's a regular F-5E. I don't think they fly F-5A or C's any more. I didn't know US Air Force/Navy flew F-5 variants. I thought they were abandoned ages ago. F-5 was very popular with countries in Europe and third world because it was good enough for many things and quite cheap to buy and run. Many air forces have retired their F-5's but still a couple of display groups use them (Swiss and Turkish air forces display teams for example).
I think the polite version of the term is "idiot-proof"...
Also I believe the gpp is comparing apples with oranges. When you boil your kettle, these bubbles occur all the time but still the temperature of the heating element stays same until amount of cavity increases incredibly and the element heats up, the circuit gets open again. Kettles only have natural convection which is not enough to sustain the steady heat transfer between the fluid and the heating element.
If the fluid is dielectric, just immerse the PC completely into it. You don't need a sealsed case, just a tub with cables going in and out. Btw, forget about moving parts, (CD-ROM/floppy). The fluid friction will be far too much. As long as you move the fluid around... It would make a nice aquarium job...