That crossfeed is really where they get a good chunk of their performance numbers from. I expect 15-20% increase from doing that....but it does make the plumbing pretty expensive and complex:)
For those whom aren't familiar with crossfeed, the outer-tanks keep the main tank topped off during flight, so that at liftoff you get thrust from all engines, but when seperation time comes, the stage seperates, but your main core is still full of fuel. It's almost like launching a Falcon 9 from halfway outside your gravity well. You get good performance:)
As far as I know, it's never been done before due to certain complexities with pressures, sloshing, pogo-ing, etc. It would be quite the revolution if they could pull it off reliably.
You'll always have an inertial nav on an aircraft. It'll just be GPS-aided for when GPS is available, and then when not it's still orders of magnitude better than what's currently in aircraft.
I mean, a nice GPS-aided inertial nav system that is good enough to go in fighter aircraft is ~$40,000. Cheaper, less accurate versions can be had for half that. When most planes are in at least the double digit millions of dollars price range, this isn't a huge cost driver...
I seriously have no idea why so many people talk about this so much; I guess it's interesting. But the problem is not on the technical side of things, but rather in the implementation-side. You have to get it certified, tested, airports upgraded, new approaches and flight corridors set up to take advantage ofit, air traffic control, etc, etc. Then someone sees all of these articles, says "Oh no, GPS on planes, but GPS is easily jammable!" Yea, like that hasn't been thought of....
Modern INS is good enough that even if you lose GPS lock, you'll be able to get where you're going very precisely. You can dead reckon very, very well with modern equipment.
I was recently flying a fairly expensive INS, and broke GPS lock in the middle of a flight. 3 hours of jet flight later, that INS showed me on the runway with the same 6-DOF (position, yaw, pitch, roll) within a couple of meters of what a still locked system was doing.
But yeah.. now I reboot frequently to verify that everything still comes up properly.
Yea, I do that too. Too many time I've been out of the house, and a power failure happens and not all of the boxes boot up correctly, and then I can't access my stuff, or the wife complains about the picture gallery being down, etc, etc.
To me, it's a good admin practice. If you aren't 100% sure that your servers boot up properly, how exactly are you prepared for a failure? Take it offline off hours, give it a reboot and make sure that it comes up, services start, and it re-joins its place in the network properly. Should be standard machine admin practices....
If it saved you money and/or fixed a problem; aka his service reaped unexpected obunties, I would think that the respectful thing to do would be to pay him. But then again, I do actually want people to tell me when other things outside of scope are wrong, because, you know, that's helpful and worth something.
I love C#.net. I have had nothing but absolute, horrible grief with NETMF. Docs wrong, examples wrong, bugs, debug being spotty, etc, etc. On the other hand, Arduino just seems to work.
Probably the hardware, but still, it is an embedded system.
These require fiber backhaul to a baseband processor, so no, they're not really designed for that. Current cell phone towers are much more monolithic and independent than these, which move most of the processing off-site.
Maybe you didn't get the memo dude, but mobile phones are, like *mobile*.
When 30,000+ people all get within one square mile, like at a sporting event, large conference, or a downtown area like Mahattan, etc what are they to do? They can't magically shit more airwaves in order to give everyone what you claim they paid for.
Please tell me how you've come about this Nirvana, because even the simplest of documents always gets messed up. Sure, it opens, but pictures are in odd places, headings are dopped or white, styles are lost, etc, etc.
Exactly. The problem here is that user opinion and google's opinion of what's working is diverging.
This is starting to feel like AltaVista just before the Google revolution hit...I know that at least 50% of my tech friends would immediately switch to a new search engine that solves the problem. That should scare Google very, very much.
I have one counter to your point about their ads needing to be better than their search. I buy lots of stuff for our company, a lot of little things here or there, one-offs, etc. Everytime I'm looking for something new, I put some words into Google, click all the relevant search results on that page, and NEARLY EVERY SINGLE AD. They're selling something, I'm trying to buy, why wouldn't I click on them?
This feeds into your point about a company demonstrating that their legitimate. For most consumer items, the ads that come up in a Google search are from reputable, good companies. It's almost exactly like your filter.
The big problem with Google is not that searching for "Widget Type X" produces too good of results. Because the ads will always produce good results also. The real problem is in searching for "something" that is not a product invariably wants to get gamed by taking the information from another site, but surrounding it with ads that they get paid for rather than the original content site, flooding the search results.
Very specific models of phones have been shown to mess with small aircraft's displays.
See page 4 of this article http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/aviation/unsafe-at-any-airspeed
I swear that the IEEE also released an article specifically naming some cellphone models, but I can't find that paper right now.
The author forgot the flip side of the sword; Google doesn't have a lot of patents, so anyone that patent trolls them risks Google spending tons and tons of dollars to get that patent invalidated. They don't have to worry about it affecting their own patents.
I can imagine that that would scare off quite a few potential lawsuits....knowing the Google might make your patent absolutely worthless.
Cyanogenmod does provide a very nice experience. It's what I use. LauncherPro Plus also helps a lot.
But you and I have different definitions of "refined". Just the pull down bar on Android makes it a much more refined experience than iOS for me. Based upon my workflow, having that is a better experience where on an iPhone I was always furiously swiping, clicking, etc. to hop between apps, get back to what I was doing, and so on. When I switched it was like night and day, for me at least. Android's workflow just seemed more refined to me.
You do realize that these things go so fast that you have to track them across large swaths of ocean, right?
You can't really build an arbitrarily large receiver in the ocean for a reasonable cost.
Heck, you can't even put a ton of arbitrarily sized trackers on the ground either without massive expenditure, probably larger than a lot of the hypersonic test projects budgets.
Doesn't sound like a software malfunction. It did exactly what it was coded to do. No Gamma Ray came in and flipped a bit. Nothing malfunctioned. Sounds like their audit and certification sucked. Maybe they should get better at it and write this off as a lesson learned?
I'd love to see the statistics on people whom gamble in Casino's versus procreation rates. I'm willing to be that the correlation would show the opposite of what you're implying.
This does add another layer, but I'm still not too sure.
I mean, so he got some technicians to enable a feature that is disabled because most gamblers do not like it.
Then he won enough and had someone else cash it out because he knew that it would raise eyebrows. That just seems like an intelligent move.
The casino's got to audit the code, so did the gaming commission. Maybe they should have better audits rather than rubber stamps? Because it sounds like some guy did a better audit than them and used it to gain an edge usually reserved for the house.
Now if he planted the bug, or paid someone to or whatever, then there's crime here. But otherwise, I'm not seeing it.....
Groups track roulette tables religiously in order to find ones that have an players edge if certain numbers are played, and that is legal. Casino's swap the tables overnight retire popular ones, conceal, etc. In this case, the casino's jsut need to audit the code a bit better.
Huh, I have a military fighter aircraft grade INS with a 2 hour battery backup packed into a 3U rackmount box right next to me that indicates it weighs 17lbs. Yea, it was expensive (low 5-figures). So are aircraft.
My smartphone gives me true compass directions. It cost next to nothing and weighs next to nothing.
Slashdot Mirror
so?
That crossfeed is really where they get a good chunk of their performance numbers from. I expect 15-20% increase from doing that....but it does make the plumbing pretty expensive and complex :)
:)
For those whom aren't familiar with crossfeed, the outer-tanks keep the main tank topped off during flight, so that at liftoff you get thrust from all engines, but when seperation time comes, the stage seperates, but your main core is still full of fuel. It's almost like launching a Falcon 9 from halfway outside your gravity well. You get good performance
As far as I know, it's never been done before due to certain complexities with pressures, sloshing, pogo-ing, etc. It would be quite the revolution if they could pull it off reliably.
You'll always have an inertial nav on an aircraft. It'll just be GPS-aided for when GPS is available, and then when not it's still orders of magnitude better than what's currently in aircraft.
I mean, a nice GPS-aided inertial nav system that is good enough to go in fighter aircraft is ~$40,000. Cheaper, less accurate versions can be had for half that. When most planes are in at least the double digit millions of dollars price range, this isn't a huge cost driver...
I seriously have no idea why so many people talk about this so much; I guess it's interesting. But the problem is not on the technical side of things, but rather in the implementation-side. You have to get it certified, tested, airports upgraded, new approaches and flight corridors set up to take advantage ofit, air traffic control, etc, etc. Then someone sees all of these articles, says "Oh no, GPS on planes, but GPS is easily jammable!" Yea, like that hasn't been thought of....
Modern INS is good enough that even if you lose GPS lock, you'll be able to get where you're going very precisely. You can dead reckon very, very well with modern equipment.
I was recently flying a fairly expensive INS, and broke GPS lock in the middle of a flight. 3 hours of jet flight later, that INS showed me on the runway with the same 6-DOF (position, yaw, pitch, roll) within a couple of meters of what a still locked system was doing.
But yeah.. now I reboot frequently to verify that everything still comes up properly.
Yea, I do that too. Too many time I've been out of the house, and a power failure happens and not all of the boxes boot up correctly, and then I can't access my stuff, or the wife complains about the picture gallery being down, etc, etc. To me, it's a good admin practice. If you aren't 100% sure that your servers boot up properly, how exactly are you prepared for a failure? Take it offline off hours, give it a reboot and make sure that it comes up, services start, and it re-joins its place in the network properly. Should be standard machine admin practices....
The fact that Motorola, the guys behind that whole 'eFuse' piece of crap, are involved pretty much seals the deal.
You mean the eFuse that is a standard part of the CPU, but was not enabled by Motorola, just like on pretty much all other cell phones? That chip?
If it saved you money and/or fixed a problem; aka his service reaped unexpected obunties, I would think that the respectful thing to do would be to pay him. But then again, I do actually want people to tell me when other things outside of scope are wrong, because, you know, that's helpful and worth something.
I love C# .net. I have had nothing but absolute, horrible grief with NETMF. Docs wrong, examples wrong, bugs, debug being spotty, etc, etc. On the other hand, Arduino just seems to work.
Probably the hardware, but still, it is an embedded system.
These require fiber backhaul to a baseband processor, so no, they're not really designed for that. Current cell phone towers are much more monolithic and independent than these, which move most of the processing off-site.
Is this meant to be a "+5 Funny"? I really hope so.....
Maybe you didn't get the memo dude, but mobile phones are, like *mobile*.
When 30,000+ people all get within one square mile, like at a sporting event, large conference, or a downtown area like Mahattan, etc what are they to do? They can't magically shit more airwaves in order to give everyone what you claim they paid for.
Please tell me how you've come about this Nirvana, because even the simplest of documents always gets messed up. Sure, it opens, but pictures are in odd places, headings are dopped or white, styles are lost, etc, etc.
Exactly. The problem here is that user opinion and google's opinion of what's working is diverging.
This is starting to feel like AltaVista just before the Google revolution hit...I know that at least 50% of my tech friends would immediately switch to a new search engine that solves the problem. That should scare Google very, very much.
Very interesting and information post. Thank you.
I have one counter to your point about their ads needing to be better than their search. I buy lots of stuff for our company, a lot of little things here or there, one-offs, etc. Everytime I'm looking for something new, I put some words into Google, click all the relevant search results on that page, and NEARLY EVERY SINGLE AD. They're selling something, I'm trying to buy, why wouldn't I click on them?
This feeds into your point about a company demonstrating that their legitimate. For most consumer items, the ads that come up in a Google search are from reputable, good companies. It's almost exactly like your filter.
The big problem with Google is not that searching for "Widget Type X" produces too good of results. Because the ads will always produce good results also. The real problem is in searching for "something" that is not a product invariably wants to get gamed by taking the information from another site, but surrounding it with ads that they get paid for rather than the original content site, flooding the search results.
Very specific models of phones have been shown to mess with small aircraft's displays. See page 4 of this article http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/aviation/unsafe-at-any-airspeed I swear that the IEEE also released an article specifically naming some cellphone models, but I can't find that paper right now.
IEEE did as thorough of a study as they could (since they dont' own the planes or airlines, etc). Fairly interesting read: http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/aviation/unsafe-at-any-airspeed
+1. This.
The author forgot the flip side of the sword; Google doesn't have a lot of patents, so anyone that patent trolls them risks Google spending tons and tons of dollars to get that patent invalidated. They don't have to worry about it affecting their own patents.
I can imagine that that would scare off quite a few potential lawsuits....knowing the Google might make your patent absolutely worthless.
Cyanogenmod does provide a very nice experience. It's what I use. LauncherPro Plus also helps a lot.
But you and I have different definitions of "refined". Just the pull down bar on Android makes it a much more refined experience than iOS for me. Based upon my workflow, having that is a better experience where on an iPhone I was always furiously swiping, clicking, etc. to hop between apps, get back to what I was doing, and so on. When I switched it was like night and day, for me at least. Android's workflow just seemed more refined to me.
I could get behind this. Kangaroo steak is delicious!
Ostrich isn't bad either, but mmmmmm......Kangaroo...
You do realize that these things go so fast that you have to track them across large swaths of ocean, right? You can't really build an arbitrarily large receiver in the ocean for a reasonable cost. Heck, you can't even put a ton of arbitrarily sized trackers on the ground either without massive expenditure, probably larger than a lot of the hypersonic test projects budgets.
Doesn't sound like a software malfunction. It did exactly what it was coded to do. No Gamma Ray came in and flipped a bit. Nothing malfunctioned. Sounds like their audit and certification sucked. Maybe they should get better at it and write this off as a lesson learned?
That's the function of the gambling regulatory commission, a government agency, so yes.
I'm definitely not siding with the casino's here, but there are checks in place. Too bad it doesn't seem like they ever check anything...
I'd love to see the statistics on people whom gamble in Casino's versus procreation rates. I'm willing to be that the correlation would show the opposite of what you're implying.
This does add another layer, but I'm still not too sure.
I mean, so he got some technicians to enable a feature that is disabled because most gamblers do not like it.
Then he won enough and had someone else cash it out because he knew that it would raise eyebrows. That just seems like an intelligent move.
The casino's got to audit the code, so did the gaming commission. Maybe they should have better audits rather than rubber stamps? Because it sounds like some guy did a better audit than them and used it to gain an edge usually reserved for the house.
Now if he planted the bug, or paid someone to or whatever, then there's crime here. But otherwise, I'm not seeing it.....
Groups track roulette tables religiously in order to find ones that have an players edge if certain numbers are played, and that is legal. Casino's swap the tables overnight retire popular ones, conceal, etc. In this case, the casino's jsut need to audit the code a bit better.
Huh, I have a military fighter aircraft grade INS with a 2 hour battery backup packed into a 3U rackmount box right next to me that indicates it weighs 17lbs. Yea, it was expensive (low 5-figures). So are aircraft.
My smartphone gives me true compass directions. It cost next to nothing and weighs next to nothing.