...Like their opinion is supposed to control our democracy?

The flying system seems to be the same one used in Thunderbirds.

I think at one time they did say they had antigravity of some sort. Apparently all it can do is make the ship weightless, and you need rockets in order to make it move around or change it's velocity.

The moon base set, as well as a lot of the models, were built for continuing the show UFO which was pretty successful at the time. That however got cancelled in the USA, and they had to come up with some new idea that reused the sets. That led to this strange story...

From whom does the Fed borrow when it does QE?

I suppose one could argue that you want the more dselicate computers behind the pilot, since then it has the greatest achievable shielding on all sides without having excessive distance from the flight controls and without becoming inaccessible if the pod that is loaded into the middle is not traversible. Similar reasoning is used in Formula 1 - delicate bits of the car (such as the fuel tank) are placed between the driver and the engine, to keep them as safe as possible without creating a burden. This would necessitate there being a step down to get to the pilot's chair. It's not a particularly good piece of "lore repair" but it's the best I can do.

The nuclear waste silos were, though.

The feet operated as vertical rockets, so I'd say the designer was thinking along the same lines you are.

The landing pads are also vertical thrusters (which is how they can skim), so you need space for the nozzle, engine, and fuel. The size of the landing pads would seem fine, given everything that needs to be in them.

I'm calculating mass in terms of filled volume. The entire mid-section of the Eagle was a mesh of girders, rather than a solid hull. Since the total space filled is 1/Nth that of a solid hull that has to be able to handle the same rotational forces, the total mass is reduced. The cross-hatch patterning is likely to be good there, as it's strong along those lines. We don't need to specifically know what the material is, or the specific mass, as long as we can use engineering techniques to figure out the percentage of material we need relative to having a solid hull.

That's true of all sci-fi, by nature. The challenge, though, is to make it as plausible as possible. The "traditional" rule (variously ascribed to Arthur C Clarke and Isaac Asimov) was that good sci-fi was allowed to violate one law of physics (although this had to be justified and explained) but everything else shoud be as plausible as possible. S:1999, as a whole, certainly did not comply with that, but if we restrict ourselves to the Eagle, then I'd say that it would just about pass muster there.

There are plenty of cities in western countries where drones are entirely prohibited and you need to drive to the countryside to fly it, observing various nature reserves and restricted airspaces.

It is also very common that training, a test or license, insurance, etc. are required.

The odd thing is that buying is restricted. Does that include ordering online?

Smartphones have matured enough there is very little incentive to upgrade.

64 camera lenses oughtta be enough for anyone!
  - Phone J. Gates

> And no the bubble isn't going to pop.

It's smells more bubblier over time. Sales of AI services are not self-supporting the hardware and infrastructure needed. AI usage numbers are based on the heavily discounted services supported by investors and market-share fights. These subsidies cannot last forever. Users will be more judicious with AI use when they have to pay real prices, and the market will realize it over-built.

Investors are pricing in big breakthroughs, and if these don't arrive, the existing stacks are financially hosed.

Let's look at the various aspects of the Eagle design.

1. It was "designed to work in space" so wasn't designed to be aerodynamic
2. It was modular
3. Mass was kept to a minimum without compromising strength, which is precisely what you would want if your job is to carry a significant mass in space and be able to manoever without ripping apart
4. Cockpits were functional and minimal, not glamorous or more advanced than necessary to do the job

There were terrible aspects as well (nowhere to keep fuel, for example), but if you were going to design a sci-fi ship that is intended to be a simple short-range transport, then the design for the Eagle is close to perfect in a way that most sci-fi vessels really aren't.

Brian Johnson really did a superb job of actually making something LOOK like a practical workhorse.

HPE is not HP. Do not confuse them. HPE was spun off into a completely separate company ages ago and has no business relationship or ownership relationship (different stock tickers etc) , decades ago.

Orbital Factories are unlikely to employ very many human workers.