The problem here is clearly about the leadership changing priorities and budgets before anything gets finished.
The projects that NASA work on have long timelines, this is not compatible with budgets which change annually and where the govenment who holds the purse strings also often changes (as in this case) before the project is completed.
This is not too different in concept (but is admitedly different in scale) to software development where if priorities are allowed to change before projects are completed, nothing ever will be finished.
Maybe NASA can try and work to smaller achievable goals within a smaller timeline that have a clearly defined benefit?
Sound familiar?
This was NIN official footage that he release on his site (just prior to the remix section going live) with the aim that fans would build their own videos and submit them to NIN.
Can't spot the link on the NIN site any more - but I definatley saw it last week. As you can see from their site however this is a feature for fan based videos.
Trent is a very smart guy and definatley is leading the way in the future of the music business.
did someone make a type in the poll?
101-200
101-300
I guestimate that I have about 150ft (yes lots) but these radio buttons won't let me pick both!
If you read the arictle you may notice that the planet doesn't get a sunset due to it having a captured rotation:
From the article:
"it is so close to its sun that its orbit is like the Moon around Earth. One face is always pointed towards its sun."
ie no sunset - sorry
I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'E's dead, that's what's wrong with it!
No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting.
When I drive I generally don't drive 100% of the time at full throttle. Being at a constant velocity all you need to do is overcome drag. This will obvious depend on the car but you know they will be working hard to being this down so at 50mph you may find that you only need 1/4 throttle which means the 5HP generator will keep you nice and topped up. Then at zero throttle you are making a net gain.
All this means is that the maths is much more complicated that your model and depending on the journey a 5HP generator could add significatly more range.
As for the car emissions standards they measure percentage of certains harmful gases not absolute volume. So a small car with a "bad" emissions can easily be much less harmful to the environment than a large engine vehicle that pushes out massive volumes of exhaust gases which results in the "good" car emiting more harmful gas than the "bad" small car. At which point a 5HP generator is not so bad for the environment as say the 150HP engine you are replacing.
Being pedantic won't this need an 8 bit graphics card? 16 bit ISA came along with the 80286 didn't it?
That said you can certainly get EGA and if you are lucky you might find an 8bit VGA card (back then VGA was new I remember my parents amstrad 2086 (had a 8086 processor at 8Mhz but boasted VGA graphics and a 640x480 display!) so it should be possible.
I agree most do not seem to grasp the nature of the question.
Why can manufacturers make high resolution LCD screens for laptops but do not use these screens to produce similar desktop LCD screens?
Maybe it is to artificialy boost the laptop market?
The smallest pixel size I have seen if from the libretto U100 screen, 7.1 inches and 1280 x 768, so why can't I have a 15 inch LCD screen at the same pixel size? ie 2540 x 1536
Lets hope microsoft don't buy the rights to the gaming franchise
I thought that you can't use this kind of probablity questions when you already know the outcome of the last 100 years of air travel. This kind of calculations as I udnerstand it is only valid for predicting future events.
So while in the next hundred years it is 1/20 (or whatever the result of the calculation is depending on how detailed you go) of a meteor and aircraft collision, you can't then say well we have already been flying for a hundred years so we a pretty due a collision.
So given it hasn't happened yet it remains increadibly unlikley that there will be a meteor vs aircraft collision.
Or did I miss something - I am sure you will tell me if I have.
I have to say that launching a shuttle while very cool in concept and very handy for returning large objects from orbit, but given how little that was used is about the heaviest solution I think you could imagine to lift a few astronauts to the space station.
I think the weight of the russian capsule with the added weight of the solid rockets, plus a few spares in case of failure would still come in as a lighter option than lifting a shuttle.
This of course will change with the new Orion as it is back to the light weight capsule idea (as is required to leave low earth orbit)
Has anyone else noticed that in the aritcle they mention "The ballute is jettisoned from the spacecraft once the desired capture orbit is achieved, the company said."
Do we need any more litter in space - especially earth orbit?
We all think of balloons being filled with light than air gasses, but in this case they will want both low compressed volume and low weight for takeoff. So it may well be that they use liquid Helium - in which case would they hang around in orbit - once the drag of the ship is gone might they bounce off the atmosphere as they are still moving at orbital velocity.
Even if they go sub orbital velocity they are still intact balloons at the edge of space and they are not going to sink down the planet easily(presumably they will be quite strong).
I am sure they will think of it - but it would just be nice to see them mention retrieval/disposal with the increasing amount of junk in space these days...
I find you lack of faith in the forth dithturbing. - Darse ("Darth") Vader