Some are too amateurish and do not have enough experience and/or money.
Others are simply pie-in-the-sky.
Rutan is trying to do things in the hardest way possible and you know what that means... However there are rumours there could be a possible government money source behind this interest by Rutan. Remains to be seen.
BTW a suborbital flight is nothing fancy. The problem is getting something in orbit or returning something back to Earth in one piece. Cheaply.
Rockets got where they are today because some government decided it was neat to have a high-speed, hard to defend, way of killing people.
The V2 was not done by private enterprise. Or Saturn V. Sorry to bust your ultra-liberal bubble.
FWIW I agree with you that for space to be explored properly it must ultimately be done by private enterprise. Competition and diversity are key. The launch market should be liberalized and regulations for space launches should be relaxed.
PS: Giving food for people who do not work is good for everyone unlike what you think. It may not be 100% fair for those who work but it is a compromise. If food was more scarce this would be an issue. Food is abundant in our present Western societies. The fact is people are paid not to produce and food is sent to the trash. Giving some away to improve social stability is good policy.
Most satellites are launched on expendable rockets because they are cheaper.
The market leader, Arianespace, currently launches using the expendable Ariane 5 rocket.
A Shuttle flight costs about 2x as more per unit of weight as Ariane 5. The Russians can launch expendables for about half the cost per unit of weight as Ariane 5 (i.e. 4x as less as the Shuttle).
The Shuttle is too labour intensive. Maintainance is very expensive. For example: every heat protection tile has special dimensions and must be checked individually before every flight. It is like a huge jigsaw puzzle.
The Shuttle currently is only good for three things:
It can carry more weight than current expendables can. Good for building ISS (but the old Saturn V launched even more for less).
It can retrieve/fix satellites in orbit (but it is cheaper to send a new one on an expendable than to pay for the Shuttle trip to fix the problem for most satellites - Hubble not included)
It can carry more people than currently available options. Soyuz can only transport three persons.
If you are having CS you should be having some classes about logic. Inquire in your class about false analogies, i.e.:
The sky is blue, hence
Dogs are purple.
You cannot use an analogy to prove your assertion of an unrelated matter.
In the end the easiest way to disprove these false analogies is to look at reality. To sum up my previous affirmations: The reality is the process of Xerox copying involves little effort while the process of implementing a piece of software requires more effort than designing it, regardless of what they say in software engineering class.
Yet more sophistry. Are you telling me that the effort involved in making a Xerox copy is the same as for making a game clone? Are you telling me that programming a game, regardless of being based on the concept of anything, involves no effort, no design, no engineering?
Have you ever programmed anything substancial in your life?
If design was everything, why does a game take days or weeks to be designed, months and years to be implemented?
How is a game made from scratch by someone else a carbon copy? The fact you, as a player, can use Warcraft II graphics in it if you own Warcraft II is irrelevant and inconsequential.
Was bnetd server also opposed because of breaching the graphics look and feel?
Their project sounds like complete bullshit. Just take a look at their homepage.
Not only do they propose to use the ZPE field to generate energy, they also propose to make their own temperature independent superconductors to make a storage device as well as use the ZPE field for propulsion.
I have these fine Mars properties I can sell you! Interested?
Those who disagree probably need to get their heads screwed on straight. Is it really, really that much of a problem to you to add a link to a rebutal (with a disclaimer beforehand)?
In a public forum like this one that is not even necessary since one can provide rebuttal in a transparent way.
This law simply extends that hability to other, more closed, reporting sites which have less public interaction.
Regarding people being able to reply elsewhere regardless of this law, the fact is you could also reply to an off base story on TV by shouting with your lungs out in the middle of the street.
IMHO the US ended up not buying the plane because of the NIH syndrome and the fact that the US really does not buy weapons technology from abroad: period.
Regarding the Canadian government pulling the plug, at that time several governments considered that bombers were obsolete, hence fighters were unnecessary. Missiles were all the rage.
The UK RAF also suffered terribly from this misguided perception.
Yes. First the UK tried to undermine the EEC by creating EFTA. Then they expected the EEC to welcome them with open arms three years later.
Blame De Gaulle for having half a spine.
Even the UK will eventually realize that the future in Europe revolves around deeper unification.
As everyone knows the Sectoids have a base in the Pyramids at Cydonia. The reason Mars is barren now is that they harvested all live on Mars millenia ago.
Earth is next!
Jump on your Avenger and get ready to kick some alien butt! Oh yeah!
Chernobyl was a worst case scenario using an obsolete nuclear reactor design (graphite moderated). Yet guess what? The whole western civilization did not end because of it.
Yes. We should finance further development of safer nuclear plants which do not require outside control to safely shutdown. We should also finance development of nuclear fuel cycles which use fuel recycling in order to reduce waste.
And I would like to know why leftists are so blindingly anti-nuclear. I am left oriented yet I think using nuclear energy is perfectly fine.
Consider the amount of dioxins and radioactivity produced by a coal plant. Is that better?
Some people put granite in their houses. It is radioactive but people do not seem to care. The Sun emits radioactivity. In fact if it was not for radioactivity we probably would not even be here because evolution would have been slower!
The fact is humans tolerate a certain amount of radiation. Regarding Plutonium being poisonous do you know Caffeine is more poisonous than Plutonium? Think about it next time you have a cup of Coffee or drink Jolt.
Nagasaki was nuked with Plutonium and people live there now. A nuclear plant meltdown makes way less radiation than any nuclear weapon.
There are nuclear plant designs which are inherently safer. They shutdown automatically without outside control when there is a problem.
If we actually recycled nuclear fuel there would be less or even zero waste. But due to some peaceniks with fear of proliferation we do not and the waste is piling up.
I am politically left oriented and, yes, green. I think we should spend more money on renewables. I think we should introduce measures to reduce CO and CO2. I think we should ban single-hulled oil tankers and if possible reduce oil consumption.
Being against nuclear power of any form whatsoever is blindingly dumb and I am glad people are starting to smart up.
Nobody wants a nuclear power plant in their backyard but no one wants a water treatment plant in their backyard either. Maybe you would prefer we went back to the time honoured tradition of dumping untreated sewers directly on the river?
Slashdot Mirror
Not running Win32 binaries. For that you need a real emulator or CPU somewhere.
Didn't MS release a PowerPC version of Windows NT eons ago? Maybe you could run some PowerPC Windows NT native apps using this. lolol.
Yep.
Others are simply pie-in-the-sky.
Rutan is trying to do things in the hardest way possible and you know what that means... However there are rumours there could be a possible government money source behind this interest by Rutan. Remains to be seen.
BTW a suborbital flight is nothing fancy. The problem is getting something in orbit or returning something back to Earth in one piece. Cheaply.
The V2 was not done by private enterprise. Or Saturn V. Sorry to bust your ultra-liberal bubble.
FWIW I agree with you that for space to be explored properly it must ultimately be done by private enterprise. Competition and diversity are key. The launch market should be liberalized and regulations for space launches should be relaxed.
PS: Giving food for people who do not work is good for everyone unlike what you think. It may not be 100% fair for those who work but it is a compromise. If food was more scarce this would be an issue. Food is abundant in our present Western societies. The fact is people are paid not to produce and food is sent to the trash. Giving some away to improve social stability is good policy.
I get that all the time playing computer games!
The market leader, Arianespace, currently launches using the expendable Ariane 5 rocket. A Shuttle flight costs about 2x as more per unit of weight as Ariane 5. The Russians can launch expendables for about half the cost per unit of weight as Ariane 5 (i.e. 4x as less as the Shuttle).
The Shuttle is too labour intensive. Maintainance is very expensive. For example: every heat protection tile has special dimensions and must be checked individually before every flight. It is like a huge jigsaw puzzle.
The Shuttle currently is only good for three things:
The sky is blue, hence
Dogs are purple.
You cannot use an analogy to prove your assertion of an unrelated matter.
In the end the easiest way to disprove these false analogies is to look at reality. To sum up my previous affirmations: The reality is the process of Xerox copying involves little effort while the process of implementing a piece of software requires more effort than designing it, regardless of what they say in software engineering class.
Have you ever programmed anything substancial in your life?
If design was everything, why does a game take days or weeks to be designed, months and years to be implemented?
How is a game made from scratch by someone else a carbon copy? The fact you, as a player, can use Warcraft II graphics in it if you own Warcraft II is irrelevant and inconsequential.
Was bnetd server also opposed because of breaching the graphics look and feel?
He shed light on your fallacy and you are disturbed. Fancy that.
You cannot see every movie you want in a theather. Only new releases or re-releases.
Regarding WarCraft is it really that original? Or is it yet another rehash of Dune II with spice having a different name?
Not only do they propose to use the ZPE field to generate energy, they also propose to make their own temperature independent superconductors to make a storage device as well as use the ZPE field for propulsion.
I have these fine Mars properties I can sell you! Interested?
In a public forum like this one that is not even necessary since one can provide rebuttal in a transparent way.
This law simply extends that hability to other, more closed, reporting sites which have less public interaction.
Regarding people being able to reply elsewhere regardless of this law, the fact is you could also reply to an off base story on TV by shouting with your lungs out in the middle of the street.
But would it have the same effect?
Mother: Stop feeding it beans dear.
Yes. We should also forbid deadly weapons like wooden planks with nails on them.
IMHO the US ended up not buying the plane because of the NIH syndrome and the fact that the US really does not buy weapons technology from abroad: period.
Regarding the Canadian government pulling the plug, at that time several governments considered that bombers were obsolete, hence fighters were unnecessary. Missiles were all the rage.
The UK RAF also suffered terribly from this misguided perception.
Blame De Gaulle for having half a spine.
Even the UK will eventually realize that the future in Europe revolves around deeper unification.
Earth is next!
Jump on your Avenger and get ready to kick some alien butt! Oh yeah!
I find this amusing.
Chernobyl was a worst case scenario using an obsolete nuclear reactor design (graphite moderated). Yet guess what? The whole western civilization did not end because of it.
Yes. We should finance further development of safer nuclear plants which do not require outside control to safely shutdown. We should also finance development of nuclear fuel cycles which use fuel recycling in order to reduce waste.
The problem is burning natural gas (i.e. methane) produces CO2. Burning hydrogen does not.
Consider the amount of dioxins and radioactivity produced by a coal plant. Is that better?
Some people put granite in their houses. It is radioactive but people do not seem to care. The Sun emits radioactivity. In fact if it was not for radioactivity we probably would not even be here because evolution would have been slower!
The fact is humans tolerate a certain amount of radiation. Regarding Plutonium being poisonous do you know Caffeine is more poisonous than Plutonium? Think about it next time you have a cup of Coffee or drink Jolt.
Nagasaki was nuked with Plutonium and people live there now. A nuclear plant meltdown makes way less radiation than any nuclear weapon.
There are nuclear plant designs which are inherently safer. They shutdown automatically without outside control when there is a problem.
If we actually recycled nuclear fuel there would be less or even zero waste. But due to some peaceniks with fear of proliferation we do not and the waste is piling up.
I am politically left oriented and, yes, green. I think we should spend more money on renewables. I think we should introduce measures to reduce CO and CO2. I think we should ban single-hulled oil tankers and if possible reduce oil consumption.
Being against nuclear power of any form whatsoever is blindingly dumb and I am glad people are starting to smart up.
Nobody wants a nuclear power plant in their backyard but no one wants a water treatment plant in their backyard either. Maybe you would prefer we went back to the time honoured tradition of dumping untreated sewers directly on the river?