Use "someone, instead of "you", and I would have just ignored it. Simple.

You know, that's about the oddest - and disturbing response I've heard to a statement like the one I made..

Short answer, I have no intention of molesting your's or anyone else's daughter. Why you would take anything like that from what I wrote is a puzzlement.

1. I would be a bit concerned about your overcompensation .

2. And online threats of violence are never encouraged. Just a friendly reminder.

Perhaps I need to explain here my dowmoddingest friends.

The J2 engine was not designed to be run at ground level. It's thrust nozzle was designed to run at altitude, with it's 27.5:1 expansion area ratio That's wide, and not efficient at sea level. In contrast, the F1 has a 16 to 1 ratio. Much more suited to lower altitude work. It's all related to the external pressure the rocket faces. Here's a pretty good explanation.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/qu...

Anyone look at the ill fated Spacex launch? before it self disassembled, it was operating in an area beyond it's most efficient operation. You could see the much wider expansion of th exhaust.

Ideally, a rocket motor would adjust the throat to exhaust ratio for best efficiency, but that would be too expensive. Probably very heavy, and possibly complicated.

The J2 is designed to be restarted also.

There were some other engines on the Saturn V rockets also. The Aux Propulsion System or APS, provided roll control while using the J-2 engines. The APS used a single SE 7-1 engine, and three TR-204. engines. They were hypergolic engines. Here's a nice descriptive page: http://www.collectspace.com/ub...

So while the fellow who asaked the original question gets downmodded to 1, the caffeine fueled maniac who thinks he knows all about Rocket engines, is modded up to three. I'm catching a couple downmods to 0.

Anyone want to accept the challenge of explaning why anyone who obviously didn't know a lot about the Saturn would be referring to the J2 or APS engines - obvious specialty engines, and the rager who missed four of the engines on the Saturn V is modded as insightful?

Or does missing over half the engines on a rocket while acting like an expert qualify one as insighful on slashdot these days?

but applause.

I also made an antenna ot of a toilet seat for a crazy antenna contest.

Yeah - outdated: http://www.flexradio.com/amate...

Hook one of these gems to your computer, and it's a wonderland of RF.

Hell yeah! I've always thought the metric for a person thinking about getting into computers was exactly this sort of thing. Under represented groups should know that you have to have that sort of passion for it. The pays not so good, the hours suck, there's almost zero respect, so you gotta have that passion, when digging into to something for fun - is fun.

If he's at all human, you'll end up being indispensable. A bos who fires you for pulling his ass out of a hot frying pan is no person to work for.

I was known for some wild seat of the pants fixes. My suits appreciated it - a lot. It's startling when a room of 7 figure folks applaud you after you bring a computer system back to life. And the weirder the fix the better the stories later. Versatility is a plus.

Alice posts a video using music that Bob owns the copyright to. Carol posts a video that uses music Bob falsely claims to also hold the copyright for. Unfortunately Bob's false claim against Carol doesn't change the fact that he actually does have a legitimate legal claim against Alice's video. So kicking him off the system means he's going to issue a takedown against Alice. The whole point of bringing him into the system was to give him an incentive to leave Alice alone.

The problem here isn't Bob and Alice -- that part of the scenario is working fine. The problem is Bob and Carol. There's no incentive for Bob not to make false claims against Carol. That's the bit that has to be fixed.

So the concept of abandoning your Lexus for a Dodge Caravan then.

IIRC, the maneuvering engines are still in production in some form, so rebuilding them would be redundant.

And isn't that the hell of it. We have self driving cars, radar based braking and road centering assist but can't put sensors on a construction robot that will inform it that something is in a place where it shouldn't be. Time to move past the silly "programmed dance" mode. It isn't rocket surgery, isn'at all that expensive, and should be considered a distinct legal liability for the companies that produce and program the things.