The most common type of sonar found on "civvy" craft would be a depth finder. Which would be a low power active sonar device. There's very little use in passive sonar (or high power active sonar) on civilian vessels outside of oceanographic research.
Except that if you're using HVDC you better have a single generation point and better be going a LOOOOOONG way. It's great for something like a hydro or nuke generator grid, but with wind farms there end up being a lot of distributed generation points rather than a few or one very large point.
Typical half-assed slack-alism. HEY! If I take a really small number and multiply it by a REALLY HUGE number, I get a REALLY BIG NUMBER! The end is nigh! Panic and chaos!!!
I'd say I have to unpredictably access my workstation during non-business hours two to three times per week. I wonder what emits more carbon per year, a 200W constant load or spending 86 hours driving?
Farcry 2 had a LOT of problems with it. But I'd suggest that *I* know when someone is outside my door without being able to see them. And back in my college years I REALLY knew when the upstairs neighbors were home without ever seeing them.
Agreed, and I have to say, I stumbled across the first episode of Castle and liked it enough to add it to the DVR schedule.
Whedon though, man Dollhouse is... lackluster. I remember hating, HATING the first episode of Firefly (well, the first one Fox aired) and never watching another one while it was airing, and then loving it when I saw the season on DVD. So I'm trying to be patient.
In fact prior to ~1992 we had to type ALL the numbers by hand, since handheld wands/scanners didn't exist yet.
And before THAT, two words: Shhhkunk-kachunk. Carbon paper FTW.
But yeah, Sears was bad. I worked there in the mid-90s, they were relentless with "Maintenance Agreements" and MIPTOYSC, "May I Put This On Your Sears Card", since they got a kickback from the Sears Card company (pre-Mastercard). Blah.
The main difference is that Mars has historically been very unfriendly to probes (both surface and orbital). Low Earth orbit we have a much better handle on, you can generally assume that launches will succeed.
Of course the Taurus XL launch vehicle hasn't been an overwhelming success, it's 6 for 8 now... Though when the failure comes from payload or fairing separation you'll get people pointing fingers at each other as to what caused the problem. From what I can see the actual rocket stages all performed correctly.
Screw any idiots who don't have cable or satellite and haven't gotten off their lazy asses to get a digital receiver. If it was SUCH an important thing to them they would have done something about it already.
We could wait another 20 years and there would still be morons crying about it. Yank the band-aid off fast and be done with it.
Somali pirates are armed. Some jackass flying around on a glorified pressure-washer is going to have AK rounds coming at him awfully fast.
A more effective tool for dealing with the Somali pirate problem would be small, cheap UAVs. This toy can get ALL the way up to 15 meters in the air? That's not "over the horizon". Even a small vessel like a frigate has a mast height much greater than 50 feet.
You also have to consider a few other things. Firstly, the intake shield would have to be made sturdy enough to withstand a large bird impact with no damage, otherwise instead of ingesting a bird you're ingesting chunks of an intake shield. So you'd have to make a movable cover that shields the engines at low speed that's heavy enough to take a 30 pound goose with no effect.
And a permanent shield is absolutely not an option because a jet engine produces thrust by accelerating hot gas out the back faster than it comes in. If you force the air to make a 90 degree bend prior to entering the compressor stages you're giving up a huge amount of power (and thus effeciency) by having to accelerate it back up. This is least "bad" at low speed but at cruise it would be horrible.
It's just not practical. The odds of losing multiple engines on opposite wings due to simultaneous bird-strikes is so minuscule it's just not worth fretting over. Losing a single engine in an ETOPS twin-engine airliner isn't all that big of a deal, they just would abort to the nearest facility. This was a freak accident, 100%.
The bird strikes did not occur near the airport. They occurred 2 minutes after takeoff at an altitude of 3,000+ feet. The aircraft was miles from the airport when it lost power.
The techniques they use are valuable because they reduce the bird density right around the airfield, and having a multi-engine failure like what happened with 1549 had would be MUCH less survivable if it occurred immediately after takeoff.
Exotic materials or advanced computer modeling don't change the fact that the power needed to overcome drag increases at the cube of velocity. Any significant improvements to engines and airframes that will affect supersonic efficiency will affect subsonic efficiency as well, and subsonic will still be less expensive.
Concorde was financially viable?? I don't know if I'd agree with that. It was a super-premium aircraft that could only carry 100 people.
A Concorde flight averaged 17 passenger-miles per gallon of fuel burned. A 747-400 gets over 90. If anything, I think the future for supersonic transport will be in medium sized business jets of the Gulfstream-V class. Large SSTs are just not practical.
Slashdot Mirror
The most common type of sonar found on "civvy" craft would be a depth finder. Which would be a low power active sonar device. There's very little use in passive sonar (or high power active sonar) on civilian vessels outside of oceanographic research.
Except that if you're using HVDC you better have a single generation point and better be going a LOOOOOONG way. It's great for something like a hydro or nuke generator grid, but with wind farms there end up being a lot of distributed generation points rather than a few or one very large point.
What is reasonable is to give people a certain level of privacy without them requiring to be in a private neighborhood.
No, that's not reasonable. "People should be able to expect privacy... in public"? I disagree entirely with that.
Typical half-assed slack-alism. HEY! If I take a really small number and multiply it by a REALLY HUGE number, I get a REALLY BIG NUMBER! The end is nigh! Panic and chaos!!!
I'd say I have to unpredictably access my workstation during non-business hours two to three times per week. I wonder what emits more carbon per year, a 200W constant load or spending 86 hours driving?
Ozone is a good thing right? Protects us from the Sun's UV radiation, right? How'd you like your house to be filled with ozone?
Farcry 2 had a LOT of problems with it. But I'd suggest that *I* know when someone is outside my door without being able to see them. And back in my college years I REALLY knew when the upstairs neighbors were home without ever seeing them.
Agreed, and I have to say, I stumbled across the first episode of Castle and liked it enough to add it to the DVR schedule.
Whedon though, man Dollhouse is... lackluster. I remember hating, HATING the first episode of Firefly (well, the first one Fox aired) and never watching another one while it was airing, and then loving it when I saw the season on DVD. So I'm trying to be patient.
Wait, no. This one goes in your mouth and THAT one goes in your butt.
Well, technically where it hits and the legal ramifications would be independent result sets...
In fact prior to ~1992 we had to type ALL the numbers by hand, since handheld wands/scanners didn't exist yet.
And before THAT, two words: Shhhkunk-kachunk. Carbon paper FTW.
But yeah, Sears was bad. I worked there in the mid-90s, they were relentless with "Maintenance Agreements" and MIPTOYSC, "May I Put This On Your Sears Card", since they got a kickback from the Sears Card company (pre-Mastercard). Blah.
Obligatory PA reference: The Whedonite's Dilemma.
One word: DIVX. When they came out supporting that abomination, it was the beginning of the end.
But, but, but the Best Buy MONSTER CABLE©®â has nitrogen-filled, oxygen-free copper hand-wound by Franciscan monks. It's insulation is specially designed and has a racing stripe and a spoiler to make the signal go faster. How could you NOT want to pay a 1000% premium??
And make sure you follow your $500 Ethernet cable's directional markings to allow for optimal signal transfer!
The main difference is that Mars has historically been very unfriendly to probes (both surface and orbital). Low Earth orbit we have a much better handle on, you can generally assume that launches will succeed.
Of course the Taurus XL launch vehicle hasn't been an overwhelming success, it's 6 for 8 now... Though when the failure comes from payload or fairing separation you'll get people pointing fingers at each other as to what caused the problem. From what I can see the actual rocket stages all performed correctly.
...and heated to 1,300 to 1,500 degrees Centigrade... for 24 hours...
Sooooo, probably not going to have a writable drive for PCs for awhile huh?
Hell, at my old apartment we just ran cat5 along the baseboards.
Screw any idiots who don't have cable or satellite and haven't gotten off their lazy asses to get a digital receiver. If it was SUCH an important thing to them they would have done something about it already.
We could wait another 20 years and there would still be morons crying about it. Yank the band-aid off fast and be done with it.
Somali pirates are armed. Some jackass flying around on a glorified pressure-washer is going to have AK rounds coming at him awfully fast.
A more effective tool for dealing with the Somali pirate problem would be small, cheap UAVs. This toy can get ALL the way up to 15 meters in the air? That's not "over the horizon". Even a small vessel like a frigate has a mast height much greater than 50 feet.
You also have to consider a few other things. Firstly, the intake shield would have to be made sturdy enough to withstand a large bird impact with no damage, otherwise instead of ingesting a bird you're ingesting chunks of an intake shield. So you'd have to make a movable cover that shields the engines at low speed that's heavy enough to take a 30 pound goose with no effect.
And a permanent shield is absolutely not an option because a jet engine produces thrust by accelerating hot gas out the back faster than it comes in. If you force the air to make a 90 degree bend prior to entering the compressor stages you're giving up a huge amount of power (and thus effeciency) by having to accelerate it back up. This is least "bad" at low speed but at cruise it would be horrible.
It's just not practical. The odds of losing multiple engines on opposite wings due to simultaneous bird-strikes is so minuscule it's just not worth fretting over. Losing a single engine in an ETOPS twin-engine airliner isn't all that big of a deal, they just would abort to the nearest facility. This was a freak accident, 100%.
The version I had would also read text that was piped to it via the command line. Which is all this Kindle reader is doing.
So Dr. Sbaitso is a copyright infringer now??
The bird strikes did not occur near the airport. They occurred 2 minutes after takeoff at an altitude of 3,000+ feet. The aircraft was miles from the airport when it lost power.
The techniques they use are valuable because they reduce the bird density right around the airfield, and having a multi-engine failure like what happened with 1549 had would be MUCH less survivable if it occurred immediately after takeoff.
Exotic materials or advanced computer modeling don't change the fact that the power needed to overcome drag increases at the cube of velocity. Any significant improvements to engines and airframes that will affect supersonic efficiency will affect subsonic efficiency as well, and subsonic will still be less expensive.
Concorde was financially viable?? I don't know if I'd agree with that. It was a super-premium aircraft that could only carry 100 people.
A Concorde flight averaged 17 passenger-miles per gallon of fuel burned. A 747-400 gets over 90. If anything, I think the future for supersonic transport will be in medium sized business jets of the Gulfstream-V class. Large SSTs are just not practical.