Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Why though? (Score 2) 76

If I recall correctly, Concorde did make money once British Airways realised the price people were willing to pay to travel supersonic. However you are correct in that the pricing 'envelope' for profitable supersonic travel is small and possibly unstable.

Concorde was largely developed before computers became widespread.

Fuel is an enormous problem, apart from the cost, there will also be the environmental concerns (Climate change, pollution and even sound)

As far as I know, the only viable contender in the way to fly hypersonic is Reaction Engines SABRE engines, but that seems a project running on millions when it really needs billions of investment.

Comment I am slightly surprised (Score 4, Interesting) 393

Instead of directly subsidising Nuclear power, it should be possible to decide the unit price paid for electricity on a number of factors including availability and the carbon footprint required to produce it. This would create a system where nuclear would be a reasonable option for 'base load', and since it's not a specific subsidy for the nuclear industry, more acceptable to all.

Comment Re:Now I am even more worried... (Score 5, Interesting) 471

In general if you have 2 sensors that disagree significantly, you disable all functions that rely on those sensors and issue an alarm.

You might be able to decide which sensor is correct from data from other systems, but that is another story

Slashdot Top Deals

Work is the crab grass in the lawn of life. -- Schulz

Working...