Yet, for some unfathomable reason, none of the commercial geostationary satellites are launched in this fashion. SpaceShipOne and Pegasus are the only things launched in this fashion and they have miserable payload. Good luck developing your three stage to orbit vehicle using scramjets.
Fine. Use a Russian S-300 PMU then. Or if you are from the USA an Aegis using RIM-161 Standard Missile 3. If you can only get Israeli, an Arrow missile. If you need more range you just require a larger missile.
The SR-71 was replaced. By spy satellites. Ever used Google Maps? That uses satellites photos. Now imagine something higher resolution and with dynamic updates.
... not again. Dude, you need Mach 25 to get into orbit. Also a scramjet, or any -jet engine, cannot work in space because there is no atmosphere to scoop oxygen from. A scramjet also needs something to push it up to speed before it can start. In short: it is useless for spaceships.
There is a lot of titanium. Titanium oxide is used as the pigment for white paint. If you ever tried buying paint, you probably realized white paint is usually cheapest. So there.
The issue is how do you turn titanium oxide into pure titanium. This process seems somewhat similar to the Fray-Farthing-Chen process. Then again I remember that used to be a hot topic at the time, but it never got to production.
The problem with using scramjets is that you need another engine for liftoff, and yet another engine for space travel (scramjets are made for travelling inside the atmosphere at only startup at a certain Mach number). With a rocket engine you only need *one* engine to go for zero velocity to space. In other summary, scramjets make no sense for space travel.
Scramjets would be nice for a high speed reconaissance platform or bomber though.
Yes, three. ULA, Orbital Sciences Corporation and SpaceX. Funny thing is, there is little to no overlap between payload capabilities of the launchers by these companies at the moment. So actually there is no competition at all.
At that launch rate NASA probably wouldn't have any vehicles left by now. They already lost two. That would make the whole venture fairly uneconomic. Not to mention that it was made to be flown manned at all times as the stupid thing cannot even land autonomously.
The Russian made stealth aircraft prototypes. Namely the MiG 1.44 and Sukhoi Berkut. The Russians never bothered producing these aircraft because they dislike expensive weapon systems.
It has nothing to do it CISC. All the present generation consoles (PS3, Xbox 360, Wii) use IBM PowerPC derived RISC CPUs.
It has to do with Cell being bandwidth and memory constrained. You cannot even access the main memory directly with one of the Cell SPUs, all access must pass by the single CPU first, causing a bottleneck. The Cell SPUs are not full fledged general purpose units either. Even Sony could not program Cell for what their originally perceived uses and had to graft a NVIDIA GPU on it because they could not get the fillrate numbers they wanted because of the limited memory bandwidth. The Cell design was a mistake. The CPU power is too weak and the SPUs crippled.
Imagine this. Blizzard goes bankrupt or decides some games are too old to need Battle.Net support. You as a customer are them screwed. Think it won't happen? It already happened for some online games...
Actually Carmack demoed his idTech 5 engine at at WWDC 2007 on a Macintosh. Of course, there is no DirectX for Macintosh and he most certainly had to use OpenGL for that uh.
Surely you are joking. A lot of the games I have played in Windows platforms of late, e.g. Mass Effect, actually use OpenAL because Microsoft's own 3D sound support in Vista is pretty flaky and not cross-platform even among Windows platforms. As for networking I seriously doubt it is better in Windows than Linux, an OS that is used for telecoms and servers.
If they do a Mac port it would be trivial to do a Linux port. This is merely politics.
Yeah Boeing's a crappy defense contractor. In space launchers the Atlas V is clearly superior for most payloads. That they still get to launch anything at all in their Delta 4 is only due to Atlas V heavy never being developed.
Their great hope is the tanker upgrade program. You probably remember the fuss a couple of years due to this.
Slashdot Mirror
Yet, for some unfathomable reason, none of the commercial geostationary satellites are launched in this fashion. SpaceShipOne and Pegasus are the only things launched in this fashion and they have miserable payload. Good luck developing your three stage to orbit vehicle using scramjets.
A rocket engine's most complex part is also the fuel pump... Unless you use pressure-fed engines, in which case you don't even need a pump at all!
You cannot reach space using just a scramjet anyway. You need rockets. There is no air in space.
Fine. Use a Russian S-300 PMU then. Or if you are from the USA an Aegis using RIM-161 Standard Missile 3. If you can only get Israeli, an Arrow missile. If you need more range you just require a larger missile.
The SR-71 was replaced. By spy satellites. Ever used Google Maps? That uses satellites photos. Now imagine something higher resolution and with dynamic updates.
... not again. Dude, you need Mach 25 to get into orbit. Also a scramjet, or any -jet engine, cannot work in space because there is no atmosphere to scoop oxygen from. A scramjet also needs something to push it up to speed before it can start. In short: it is useless for spaceships.
The issue is how do you turn titanium oxide into pure titanium. This process seems somewhat similar to the Fray-Farthing-Chen process. Then again I remember that used to be a hot topic at the time, but it never got to production.
Scramjets would be nice for a high speed reconaissance platform or bomber though.
Does the N900 fit into my shirt pocket?
Probably produces yes. Remember a COIL laser is something where you generate laser light by mixing a bunch of chemicals.
You are probably being confused by test flights done with Saturn I prior to Saturn V.
Yes, three. ULA, Orbital Sciences Corporation and SpaceX. Funny thing is, there is little to no overlap between payload capabilities of the launchers by these companies at the moment. So actually there is no competition at all.
At that launch rate NASA probably wouldn't have any vehicles left by now. They already lost two. That would make the whole venture fairly uneconomic. Not to mention that it was made to be flown manned at all times as the stupid thing cannot even land autonomously.
They launched RazakSAT sucessfully. Sure beats Boeing Delta III uh?
Has the F-22 ever been used in any conflict?
Typhoon class submarines, for example, have surface to air missiles.
Roman Empire versus Carthage. First Punic War.
Intel is usually fairly optimistic about long term predictions. They bet on EUV being available early and isn't for example.
It has to do with Cell being bandwidth and memory constrained. You cannot even access the main memory directly with one of the Cell SPUs, all access must pass by the single CPU first, causing a bottleneck. The Cell SPUs are not full fledged general purpose units either. Even Sony could not program Cell for what their originally perceived uses and had to graft a NVIDIA GPU on it because they could not get the fillrate numbers they wanted because of the limited memory bandwidth. The Cell design was a mistake. The CPU power is too weak and the SPUs crippled.
FWIW IIRC Java doesn't allow unsigned integers either...
Imagine this. Blizzard goes bankrupt or decides some games are too old to need Battle.Net support. You as a customer are them screwed. Think it won't happen? It already happened for some online games...
Hydrogen is not a storable propellant. Solid propellants such as the ones used in the Shuttle SRBs produce clorine gas on combustion.
Actually Carmack demoed his idTech 5 engine at at WWDC 2007 on a Macintosh. Of course, there is no DirectX for Macintosh and he most certainly had to use OpenGL for that uh.
If they do a Mac port it would be trivial to do a Linux port. This is merely politics.
The R-16 was an ICBM, not a space launch vehicle. No "astronauts" died there. Just technicians and military personnel.
Their great hope is the tanker upgrade program. You probably remember the fuss a couple of years due to this.