The problem with SNC is: can they do the vehicle or not? It is difficult to design any RLV let alone one of that configuration. They can do hybrid rocket engines (they did the SpaceShipOne engine after all). That's like half of the problem. As for Blue Origin... well I haven't seen anything other than demonstrators of things which will not be used in any meaningful suborbital or orbital vehicle. It seems, to me at least, they keep spending a lot of money on one off things without having a long term technological path or vision. But hey it's Bezos's money not mine...
It's $99 now. Who knows what it will cost in the future. It is still wrong. Why the heck should anyone have to ask Microsoft to be able to run software on their own PC? Microsoft isn't even a PC manufacturer.
The US had military support by France which was one of the largest military powers in the world at the time. Same thing happened in Vietnam where they had the support of the Soviet Union.
Pakistan used to support the Taliban regime since way back. Allegedly they wanted to merge the two countries in order to better counter the Indian army. Supposedly they no longer support them. The Chinese have enough issues with the Muslims on their border to be terribly interested in supporting them either... However that doesn't stop private donations of money and weapons from flowing into the region.
The Vietnam War was very different from Hitler invading France. In the case of Vietnam it was either a war of nationalism against a foreign occupying power (back when France still controlled Indochina) or a civil war between North and South forces.
Lack of resources will make people more likely to commit violent crime. e.g. parents killing their children over food in the Irish famine in the XIXth century.
I don't know where you got those numbers for EROI for nuclear. Most likely the U-235 is being separated using gas diffusion rather than centrifuges and other bullshit assumptions are being made to make the numbers worse. 30 years for return on investment is clearly bollocks since nuclear power plants originally had a 20 years lifespan. If that was the case they wouldn't get built to begin with, people would have kept burning coal instead.
You really need to read more about coal and lignite vs anthracite etc. Coal is filthy regardless of which kind you use but some are worse than others. Lignite (aka brown coal) is just about the worst kind of coal you can burn. Scrubbers are not perfect and cannot remove all the impurities from burning lignite.
There is more energy being generated in Germany burning natural gas (probably Russian) than all the renewables combined. Most electricity comes from burning coal and the fraction is only going to increase after the nuclear reactors get shut down. Or didn't you read about the plan for building new coal power plants in Germany?
It is called delivering a proportional response. Sort of the military equivalent of for every action there is a reaction. There is a reason why the military still train hand to hand combat, knife fights, etc in an age where there are hand-held machineguns and strategic nuclear weapons.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with SNC is: can they do the vehicle or not? It is difficult to design any RLV let alone one of that configuration. They can do hybrid rocket engines (they did the SpaceShipOne engine after all). That's like half of the problem. As for Blue Origin... well I haven't seen anything other than demonstrators of things which will not be used in any meaningful suborbital or orbital vehicle. It seems, to me at least, they keep spending a lot of money on one off things without having a long term technological path or vision. But hey it's Bezos's money not mine...
It's $99 now. Who knows what it will cost in the future. It is still wrong. Why the heck should anyone have to ask Microsoft to be able to run software on their own PC? Microsoft isn't even a PC manufacturer.
The SOFC is made of brittle ceramics which cost a bundle. Hit a bump on the road and you probably cracked it.
Erm Hermann Goering? He actually was a WWI fighter ace.
Seems like UTF-8 mangling.
The guy was a VS Project Manager at MS. It's in his bio...
The Viet Cong were poorly armed sure. But the NVA had SAM missile batteries and Mig-21 fighters.
The French had about as many troops as the US in the field and the British forces were outnumbered in every way possible.
"It would be a war crime for a military to use hunting ammunition."
So instead they use what? 0.50 BMG rounds or 30 mm cannon rounds?
The US had military support by France which was one of the largest military powers in the world at the time. Same thing happened in Vietnam where they had the support of the Soviet Union.
Guns aren't silent and perfect crimes are a myth as well.
Pakistan used to support the Taliban regime since way back. Allegedly they wanted to merge the two countries in order to better counter the Indian army. Supposedly they no longer support them. The Chinese have enough issues with the Muslims on their border to be terribly interested in supporting them either... However that doesn't stop private donations of money and weapons from flowing into the region.
The Vietnam War was very different from Hitler invading France. In the case of Vietnam it was either a war of nationalism against a foreign occupying power (back when France still controlled Indochina) or a civil war between North and South forces.
Lack of resources will make people more likely to commit violent crime. e.g. parents killing their children over food in the Irish famine in the XIXth century.
They jump off tall buildings.
Depending on a single customer isn't healthy for any company in the long term.
I was being sarcastic.
first-world / second-world originally meant US-aligned vs Soviet-aligned countries. The third-world meant unaligned countries.
Keeps going up but I don't have anything manufactured over there anymore... I used to.
Are they the property of Columbia Tristar or Sony Music?
Nah. That is in an alternate timeline. Just ask John Titor next time he comes around.
I don't know where you got those numbers for EROI for nuclear. Most likely the U-235 is being separated using gas diffusion rather than centrifuges and other bullshit assumptions are being made to make the numbers worse. 30 years for return on investment is clearly bollocks since nuclear power plants originally had a 20 years lifespan. If that was the case they wouldn't get built to begin with, people would have kept burning coal instead.
How long ago was the U-235 on Earth created?
You really need to read more about coal and lignite vs anthracite etc. Coal is filthy regardless of which kind you use but some are worse than others. Lignite (aka brown coal) is just about the worst kind of coal you can burn. Scrubbers are not perfect and cannot remove all the impurities from burning lignite.
Looking at these stats: http://www.iea.org/stats/electricitydata.asp?COUNTRY_CODE=DE
There is more energy being generated in Germany burning natural gas (probably Russian) than all the renewables combined. Most electricity comes from burning coal and the fraction is only going to increase after the nuclear reactors get shut down. Or didn't you read about the plan for building new coal power plants in Germany?
It is called delivering a proportional response. Sort of the military equivalent of for every action there is a reaction. There is a reason why the military still train hand to hand combat, knife fights, etc in an age where there are hand-held machineguns and strategic nuclear weapons.