Pirate 4x4 banner

101 - 120 of 148 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,780 Posts
Nevermind the fact that Lockheed makes fucking planes lol

They make the C-130. If anyone were capable of making an alternative, it's them. Doubt it's cost effective for them to produce a competitor.
iirc aren't there only like two an225s worldwide?
yeah, the market ain't there lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,273 Posts
1) Because SpaceX is not a viable option. At the rate they are hemorrhaging money they won't be around in 5 years (almost as fast as Tesla is)

2)There is, currently no viable private company in the US capable of putting our stuff in space. We are forced to go to other countries for this.

3)musk is a fucking moron, who's only claim to fame is he can take credit for other peoples smarts, and sell good snake oil (just like that fuck Jobs was)
He's not taking credit for your stupidity, thank Allah.

Let's hear from you when you use that intellect of yours to make a few billion and then start your own private rocket company.

You fucking arm chair useless cunt.

Addendum:

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”

Issac Asimov

“A Cult of Ignorance” by Isaac Asimov, 1980
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,137 Posts
Thanks that's interesting. wonder how many gallons of fuel on that single one leg flight ? The other costs that go into pricing a flight like tis must be quite extensive. :idea:

Can a real bad hail storm affect or damage this craft ?? (on the ground)
It would affect it just like any other plane. We would hold transport and loading if severe weather was en route.

it would be nice if the US had an option to, and the resources to, put satellites in space, say for military purposes and communication purposes. from a national security standpoint, i have been shocked we are unable and unwilling to.

and wouldn't it be nice if NASA was able to bid on or provide the transport services in competition with private carriers, similar to how the USPS competes with UPS and FEDEX, etc?
We do have that capability. What is being discusssed is a Japanese private cmpany's sattelite. You don't want NASA attempting to compete with anyone or anything. It would cost 4x as much to do the same work, and they would never be competitive. It would be a black hole to taxpayer dollars.a

Mattafact;44772082. In all fairness to ULA said:
This is true. When you have a billion dollar asset to put into space you put it on an Atlas V. The Vulcan is a cool project. It was my last project before I left ULA.
 

·
Wut?
Joined
·
14,914 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,271 Posts
I can understand the distaste for Musk and cock in mouth. I would not proffer in semi-intelligent conversation that he is a financial loser or lacking in useful intelligence. Even in the darkest off topic giz sling wars and deprived depths I learn from PBB. The reason satellites are preferred to be launched from lower latitudes, etc. Allahu Akbar !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,929 Posts
I do not like musk or his taxpayer funded boondoggles, but the technology they've developed is legit.

whether or not they have enough money to see it to it's full fruition is the question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,273 Posts
I do not like musk or his taxpayer funded boondoggles, but the technology they've developed is legit.

whether or not they have enough money to see it to it's full fruition is the question.
I'm no fan boi, but look:

Who makes a billion bucks, and sits around designing companies just to bilk to Gov?


C'mon.

This is Heinlein level epic in the real World. In our lifetime.

D.D. Harriman

:flipoff2:

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
248 Posts
the story about how those got built at the santa barbara airport is pretty interesting.

basically guy took the NASA contract but didn't actually have aircraft.

Him and a bunch of not aeronautical engineer types built those things on the air port property.

IIRC the first one wasn't even built in a hanger as they hadn't yet built a hanger large enough for it.

then the next couple were built inside a big hanger purpose built.
That's cool. I had to look it up. This part was interesting:



Here's what I think is the original:




oh shit, thats pretty funny

i ASSumed the odd shape helped to provide lift/ was the strongest shape after confirming with many calculations

WRONG! it got eyeballed in a parking lot by some yahoos :laughing:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,273 Posts
It would affect it just like any other plane. We would hold transport and loading if severe weather was en route.



We do have that capability. What is being discusssed is a Japanese private cmpany's sattelite. You don't want NASA attempting to compete with anyone or anything. It would cost 4x as much to do the same work, and they would never be competitive. It would be a black hole to taxpayer dollars.a


This is true. When you have a billion dollar asset to put into space you put it on an Atlas V. The Vulcan is a cool project. It was my last project before I left ULA.
Your telling of your real world experiences are much appreciated.

:beer:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,929 Posts
oh shit, thats pretty funny

i ASSumed the odd shape helped to provide lift/ was the strongest shape after confirming with many calculations

WRONG! it got eyeballed in a parking lot by some yahoos :laughing:
absolutely.

and if I recall the whole conversation got started because an acquaintance or friend or someone that the guy knew had just bought a bunch of stratocruisers second hand.

it wasn't chosen because it was the best, but because it was available.

they made that shit happen.

it's a very interesting story of what we used to be able to do in this country with nothing more than a couple of dudes and a will to make shit happen.

you know, before government got involed and would require ten years of flight testing before they let it do anything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,665 Posts
1) Because SpaceX is not a viable option. At the rate they are hemorrhaging money they won't be around in 5 years (almost as fast as Tesla is)

2)There is, currently no viable private company in the US capable of putting our stuff in space. We are forced to go to other countries for this.

3)musk is a fucking moron, who's only claim to fame is he can take credit for other peoples smarts, and sell good snake oil (just like that fuck Jobs was)
1. They are privately traded so we don't really know. They are reusing so much of their rockets that the cost should drop even more in the future. Tesla assuages white liberal guilt so they'll be around forever. :flipoff2:

2. Look at the alternatives. The Ariane and Atlas Launch vehicles are both more than twice the cost of a Falcon 9 launch which is why SpaceX has gotten so many contracts. Who else is out there to launch of full size satellite? The Russians? I read somewhere that they are losing contracts to SpaceX because of cost. The Europeans? Yeah right. The Chinese? Perhaps. Can you think of anyone else? Stratolaunch is a joke and floudering after Paul Allen's death.

3. Musk is a strange, kinda creepy dude but he takes big risks. You have to give him that.

Look at the bright side. Soon you'll be setting up VPNs across Elon's Starlink network. :flipoff2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
266 Posts
I hope not.
satellites for data brings the fucking suck.
That's because latency. Latency happens because satellites are far away. Starlink satellites are much less far away(they are lower), so in theory, there should be less latency.

Elon's whole plan with that is to make Starlink appealing to electronic market traders who live an die by latency and charge them a premium to be faster than traditional transatlantic/transpacific cables, so I'm guessing they have somehow figured it out. Or he's talking out of his ass.

Time will tell, but if it can live up to the promises, starlink is going to be pretty bad ass.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,929 Posts
You're still beaming a signal to space and back.
I doubt lower latency than sending that same signal over terrestrial fiber.

you've got a 500 mile there and back even at the lowest possible orbit.
and that's just to ping the satellite, it's not accounting for the satellite network's latency to get you to whatever connection they're feeding it.


or I can route my shit across fiber for 150 miles and hit the big data pipes in the nearest city.

hopefully it hooks up rural customers, but I don't see it possibly competing with fiber/coax for cost/speed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38,236 Posts
you've got a 500 mile there and back even at the lowest possible orbit.
No.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_Earth_orbit

Wikipedia said:
A low Earth orbit (LEO) is an Earth-centered orbit with an altitude of 2,000 km (1,200 mi) or less
Edit: I R dumb :laughing: Anyway, LEO is all the way down to about 120 miles above sea level. Compare that to over 22,000 miles for the geo-stationary orbit you're probly thinking of for current satellite internet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
266 Posts
101 - 120 of 148 Posts
Top