They could in a sense. The SR-71 would already be going so fast and high that SAMs would conceivably run out of fuel before getting a chance to catch up. It might have trouble with some of the newer systems (SA-21 Growler), but there are several documented instances of SR-71s outrunning contemporary SAMs.
It's simple. The creative energy that many had applied towards Wikipedia has been tempered because there are groups of people who are determined to stamp out any "non-free" information (as opposed to information which is publicly useable but 'non-free').
You're incorrect to reference orbital spaceflight in this context. Unmanned orbital spaceflight is already well within the capabilities of private industry. The current focus is on manned orbital spaceflight. The mechanics of manned orbital spaceflight are considerably more difficult than launching an unmanned probe of any sort. The main difference between unmanned orbital spaceflight and going to the moon is achieving escape velocity from Earth and ensuring that you are subsequently captured by the moon's gravity.
By flying direct, you reduce the time in the air. As it is, you lose time flying from, say, Phoenix to Los Angeles to Seoul to Pusan. Now you can fly from Phoenix to Seoul to Pusan, or with some destinations, eliminate the hub layovers all together. And the shortest distance between two points...
The point of the 787 is to fly further, more cheaply. So while costing less to fly, it is also supposed to do to the Pacific what the Boeing 767 did to the Atlantic market. That is, the 767 brought in a revolution of being able to connect mid-sized cities on both continents, rather than forcing people to go through hubs on larger aircraft such as the 747 or DC-10.
You are joking, right? Assembly of the first A350 won't even begin for about 5 years. It's not at design freeze. The 787 is about to roll out, and first flight is in a few months.
Delta and Continental have not flown 747s for years. Emirates' only 747 interest is that they are buying some 747 freighters. The others do have 747s though.
At least as it looks right now, the only system that's even going to be an improvement over GPS is Galileo, and even then it won't be by much.
Not only that, but GPS III will obsolete Galileo anyhow. I can understand the EU trying to do this for free for security and employment reasons, but charging for it is stupid. Who the hell is going to pay for use?
I've found that to order a DL585, the leadtime via HP Direct is 4-5 weeks. I can call up any number of channel partners and get one overnight. In fact, I did just that last week, and got three of them.
OK, so let's look at the two possibilities:
1) The U.S. Government goes through the exercise of stealing, or at least diverting an existing commercial satellite to allow them to use it for their own goals, and they do it in a highly visible manner.
Or...
2) They simply use stealth satellites that they already know how to build. Perhaps they use supposedly dummy warheads, or piggyback it on an existing launch. An excellent candidate would be the Delta IV Heavy payload that "failed" a few months ago. But anyhow, look up Mystic...it's a stealth satellite program.
The system exists for the benefit of the Department of Defense, and is provided for everyone else on an as-is basis, no warranty implied. You can't sue the DoD if you rely upon GPS and somtehing goes wrong as a result.
It's a matter of course in the U.S. with the FAA -- you can't rely solely upon GPS. You have to have the training and technical capability to operate without. And since everyone else worldwide relies upon what the FAA and JAA (EU) set, that pretty much makes it true everywhere else.
Slashdot Mirror
They could in a sense. The SR-71 would already be going so fast and high that SAMs would conceivably run out of fuel before getting a chance to catch up. It might have trouble with some of the newer systems (SA-21 Growler), but there are several documented instances of SR-71s outrunning contemporary SAMs.
Before the launch, perhaps, but was iTunes (as it existed in 1999) conceived before or after the patent filing?
This is the way I was taught it would happen on astronomy shows from the 1980s. I don't get the big deal.
It's simple. The creative energy that many had applied towards Wikipedia has been tempered because there are groups of people who are determined to stamp out any "non-free" information (as opposed to information which is publicly useable but 'non-free').
Not everyone is as eager to regress as you are.
Coincidentally, it was Raytheon who invented the microwave oven. They sold commercial products under the Amana brand.
You're incorrect to reference orbital spaceflight in this context. Unmanned orbital spaceflight is already well within the capabilities of private industry. The current focus is on manned orbital spaceflight. The mechanics of manned orbital spaceflight are considerably more difficult than launching an unmanned probe of any sort. The main difference between unmanned orbital spaceflight and going to the moon is achieving escape velocity from Earth and ensuring that you are subsequently captured by the moon's gravity.
By flying direct, you reduce the time in the air. As it is, you lose time flying from, say, Phoenix to Los Angeles to Seoul to Pusan. Now you can fly from Phoenix to Seoul to Pusan, or with some destinations, eliminate the hub layovers all together. And the shortest distance between two points...
The point of the 787 is to fly further, more cheaply. So while costing less to fly, it is also supposed to do to the Pacific what the Boeing 767 did to the Atlantic market. That is, the 767 brought in a revolution of being able to connect mid-sized cities on both continents, rather than forcing people to go through hubs on larger aircraft such as the 747 or DC-10.
You are joking, right? Assembly of the first A350 won't even begin for about 5 years. It's not at design freeze. The 787 is about to roll out, and first flight is in a few months.
Delta and Continental have not flown 747s for years. Emirates' only 747 interest is that they are buying some 747 freighters. The others do have 747s though.
It sounds a lot like Triana to me, except for a somewhat different view.
© Leo Plotkin
OSX9?
I've found that to order a DL585, the leadtime via HP Direct is 4-5 weeks. I can call up any number of channel partners and get one overnight. In fact, I did just that last week, and got three of them.
No, but we're a pretty damn big chunk of it, on a first-language basis.
European? I suggest you look at who owns Braun. I'll give you a hint. They're based in Boston.
OK, so let's look at the two possibilities: 1) The U.S. Government goes through the exercise of stealing, or at least diverting an existing commercial satellite to allow them to use it for their own goals, and they do it in a highly visible manner. Or... 2) They simply use stealth satellites that they already know how to build. Perhaps they use supposedly dummy warheads, or piggyback it on an existing launch. An excellent candidate would be the Delta IV Heavy payload that "failed" a few months ago. But anyhow, look up Mystic...it's a stealth satellite program.
Why would you say a silly thing like that? OLED is a Kodak innovation. Your intransigence is showing.
You mean Windriver, right?
LORAN is on its way out.
The system exists for the benefit of the Department of Defense, and is provided for everyone else on an as-is basis, no warranty implied. You can't sue the DoD if you rely upon GPS and somtehing goes wrong as a result.
It's a matter of course in the U.S. with the FAA -- you can't rely solely upon GPS. You have to have the training and technical capability to operate without. And since everyone else worldwide relies upon what the FAA and JAA (EU) set, that pretty much makes it true everywhere else.
Not strictly true. WAAS has been sold by the manufacturer (Raytheon) to India and Japan, among others. The EU are implementing a compatible version.