Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:SLS and comparing to spacex (Score 1) 129

by 0123456 (#47534447) Attached to: SLS Project Coming Up $400 Million Short

True.

But the SLS should be able to lift twice as much as SpaceX's future Falcon Heavy and 10 times the current Faclon 9.

Nope. The SLS will launch up to 70 tons. It may one day launch more, but that'll require a whole load more development funding.

If we want to launch man into deep space, we are going to need something close to SSL than the Falcon 9.

Nope. You just need more launches. If NASA are going to send humans to Mars, they're not going to do it with a single 130 ton launch.

Comment: Re:putting OP's bullshit into context (Score 1) 129

by 0123456 (#47533951) Attached to: SLS Project Coming Up $400 Million Short

Most realistic estimates say it's only going to cost one billion per launch, not several.

It's going to fly once every couple of years, if you're lucky. It's going to require thousands of people to prepare it for launch. It's going to require all the facilities for those thousands of people, and more who aren't involved in the launch, but are involved in the rest of the program.

If you think NASA can fund that for $500,000,000 a year, I've got a bridge you might like to buy. Remeber, a shuttle launch didn't cost $1,500,000,000 because of the variable costs of each launch, it cost that much because of the fixed costs of keeping them flying.

Comment: Re:putting OP's bullshit into context (Score 1) 129

by 0123456 (#47533713) Attached to: SLS Project Coming Up $400 Million Short

SpaceX will be flying astronauts in their Dragon capsule. I believe the CST100 is designed to be Falcon-compatible, but it's unlikely to ever fly on one.

As for SLS, there isn't a single budgeted mission outside low orbit. And there's not likely to be, when it will cost billions of dollars every time it flies, due to the high development costs, low flight rate, and standing army and facilities required to launch it.

Comment: Re:SLS and comparing to spacex (Score 3, Insightful) 129

by 0123456 (#47533683) Attached to: SLS Project Coming Up $400 Million Short

The SLS is a deep space vehicle.

Uh, no, it's not. There's nothing 'deep space' about SLS that's not 'deep space' about Falcon 9. You can launch a deep space probe on Falcon 9, and you could launch a deep space probe on SLS if it's ever built.

SLS, as designed, is just a very expensive way to put 70 tons into orbit. Maybe, at some point, if Congress funds it, it might become a very expensive way to put 100-130 tons into orbit. Well before then, Falcon Heavy should be putting 50 tons into orbit for less than 5% of the cost of an SLS launch.

Comment: Re:Another unverifiable "encryption product"... (Score 1) 91

by 0123456 (#47518133) Attached to: Intel Launches Self-Encrypting SSD

... treat it as a regular unencrypted drive and apply proper encryption on top. Next.

While true, the problem with that approach is that the SSDs compress the data you write to them to improve performance and wear-levelling. So, if you encrypt the disk at the operating system level, you lose all that.

Obviously, if most of your data is already compressed, it won't matter.

Old programmers never die, they just branch to a new address.

Working...