Re: Great news
There is. NASA are testing the giant space trampoline next month.
4028 posts • joined 18 Jun 2009
There is. NASA are testing the giant space trampoline next month.
You can make Google obliged to report any profits relating to the UK. They sell advertising both globally, and specific to the UK market. Now you might not be able to capture tax on the global stuff, but anything advertised specifically to UK customers is relatively easy to demonstrate.
There's huge room for fights here. There will never be a perfect tax system that doesn't over-burden companies with regulation or tax, or let them take the piss. But we're currently at the extreme piss-taking swing of the public policy spectrum, and so naturally (as these things do) there's a reaction against that. We'll probably start moving too far back the other way.
This is another facet of globalisation. It's had many positive benefits, but also some costs. Society reacts slowly to change, and so we're still only scratching the surface of what we need to do about it. But big companies are really taking the piss on tax, they know it, everyone else knows it. They're rubbing everyone's faces in it, and maybe their executives are stupid enough to think they can get away with it forever. But times have changed, public mood has changed, and governments in the West are in desperate need of more tax revenue. Like banking, the sector as a whole needs to start behaving more reasonably, and in a manner that is sustainable in terms of long-term public opinion. Or the chances are they'll get regulated to buggery.
Populism (of right and left) is on the march in politics. Especially in Europe. That's changed the political landscape. A lot of things that have pretty much been settled for the last few decades may change dramatically. Or not. Economics is changing too. China's rise is looking likely to slow, because you can't bankrupt your customers without eventually screwing yourself too. This is a lesson that huge trade-surplus economies like China and Germany are going to learn painfully over the next few years - along with certain multi-nationals who rely on mixed market Western economies for their survival but don't want to pay the taxes that make them work.
Troll/idiot/joker, or maybe he or she has a different agenda to yours Spartacus?
I have no agenda, my anonymous friend. I can't imagine many people do, as all we're doing is posting on the forums of a reasonably obscure online IT publication. I suppose timewasting might count as an agenda...
Why are you so keen to rubbish them?
Why not? Why would I post something on this forum at all? I guess to add to the gaiety of nations. Or out of boredom or a work-avoidance-strategy.
If their opinion is utter garbage then either 'Downvote' or do what most people do and just ignore them. If you do that then maybe they'll go away.
See above. Why post on here at all? I guess it was for the amusement of my fellow commentards. Also out of interest, as I've never seen such an odd argument put before. I've seen all the shadows being wrong / wavey flags / camera stuff before. That's not interesting. But I've never seen someone argue the moonlandings didn't happen because there's no Kennedy Space Centre on the moon. Yet every single one of these Orion articles has some variation of it. That's genuinely interesting.
Now I'm also interested by your motivation, for your slightly odd post. You could have ignored me, as you advised me. You could have used a username, to make it easier to reply. You could perhaps be the offended party, who I was somewhat dismissive of. Or someone leaping to their defence. Or a fellow believer in anti-moonlanding-conspiracy-nutjobbery. Who knows? What could be more interesting than the thoughts and beliefs of my fellow human beings?
It's supposed to be re-usable. Although it's cheating, as they throw the rocket away. Then again, the shuttle itself threw two rockets and a honking great tank away on every launch. Well I know they re-used bits of the SRBs, but not with the hoped for success.
SpaceX are getting pretty shuttley though. They've designed a re-usable capsule, and the first stage of one of their rockets is doing a test landing next week.
You just have to remember that rockets are very tall, and very thin. And most of the stuff you control them with is right at the bottom. It's hard enough to get them to go in a straight line anyway, without adding even more factors that make them unstable. Balance a pencil on its end on your finger, try and hold that upright. Now blow on it...
Winds in the upper atmosphere can regularly hit over 100 mph as well, even on calm days at surface level. This is why trans-Atlantic flight times might vary by over an hour (if the jetstream is going really fast). That's a lot of force exerted on a rocket, which it has to correct for. Although in this case it was apparently low altitude wind.
However, our troll/idiot/joker is correct. There's no way the Moon landings could be real. It's an established fact that the Moon is made of cheese. So where the rockets landed and took off, you'd get a fondue effect. As no astronauts were ever seen drinking unfeasibly vast quantities of wine while eating potatoes, charcuterie, bread and pickles - it can be firmly established that the moon-landings are a fake.
Unless the Moon is made of hallumi I suppose. You can hit that stuff with blowtorches, and it doesn't even bend, let alone melt...
We had a couple of odd comments about this (difference between Earth and Moon launch) on the other Orion threads. Do we have a troll, a serious moon-conspiracy nut, or is it supposed to be a joke?
I really can't decide which...
You're on the train. It's 6:02 am. You're making your bleary-eyed way in to work. You turn on your phone, and bung some music to your bluetooth headphones, and lean back for a bit of relaxation before the day kicks off.
Your bluetooth headlines have received a software update, says an un-earthly robotic voice in your ear. Followed by several beeps and a few reboots. No music. Just the sound of papers shuffling and the train rattling.
Suddenly your music comes on. And you lean back in your seat, the day going OK now. You got a seat. The gentle sound of relaxing jazz soothes you.
Suddenly, in a very loud voice! SONY HEADPHONES ARE THE BEST HEADPHONES! WHY NOT GO ONLINE TODAY TO SEE HOW YOU COULD UPGRADE TO OUR LATEST MODEL? OR NOW THAT YOU'RE HAPPY WITH OUR PORTABLE BLUETOOTH HEADPHONES, WHY NOT TRY OUT OUR SURROUNDSOUND HD AUDIO AUDIOPHILE CLASSICS AT HOME? FOR A SPEICAL PRICE OF ONLY £399!!!"
Aarrgh! What was that? The jazz cuts back in. Peace. Did you dream that? Should you have eaten that cheese last night?
Beep! "Software update!" Says an unearthly electronic voice in your ear. Without further ado your headphones reboot themselves. Again you listen to the sounds of the train. Waiting for your music to come back.
You glance at your mobile phone. It's 6:21 now. The track you are listening to is displayed under the clock, you have listened to 23 seconds of it so far.
Beep. Your headphones are updated. The soothing sounds waft back into your ears, calming the momentary flaring of anger.
Beep! "HAHAHAHAHAHA! LOSER! YOUR SONY HEADPHONES HAVE BEEN HACKED BY THE 4NTI-S0NY-CRU! WE HATE SONY! YOU ARE A LOSER FOR USING SONY. YOU HAVE BEEN HEADPWNED. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
...When the train arrived at the station, British Transport Police were alerted by screaming passengers to the carnage inside. Tne people bludgeoned to death in a blood-spattered frenzy. An orgy of violence. The killer was apprehended immediately. A blood-soaked wretch found sobbing in the corner of the carriage. His mind gone - a lifetime at Broadmoor awaiting him. But they were unable to find the murder weapon. Until one pathologist had an idea and was able to grasp the significance of the unusual and tiny grains of plastic found embedded in all the victims. After months of painstaking work, he was able to piece together the remains of some earphones. The case remains unexplained to this day...
not been to a gallery lately then?
Why yes. I have been. I decided to shelve my prejudices and go to Tate Modern. Rather than getting my opinions of modern art from the press and TV, I decided it was better to give it a fair crack of the whip.
After a couple of hours, I found myself in one particular gallery full of crap paintings and I heard somenone say (rather loudly), "this is all utter bollocks!" I must say I found myself in full agreement with their opinion, and looked round to see who this perceptive individual was.
Only to see everyone else looking around too, and at me. On replaying the voice in my head, I realised that the person speaking had been me. And decided that this was a good time to beat a tactical retreat to the cafe, and consume a pot of tea, and a very large cake. Modern art and I seemingly don't get on...
OK, I know you can improve a panel with better processors, and a few extra USB and HDMI slots cost a few more pence too. But wow!
I bought a Panasonic 50" for £500 2 years ago. It's full HD and LED. The screen copes perfectly with moving action - although it's not 800Hz (or whatever we're up to now), it's got a perfectly functioning Freeview tuner. The speakers are truly awful, and you can't hear the dialogue without turning the sound up so high that all the effects deafen the neighbours. But that seems to be true of all flat tellies, and of course the crap mixing from TV and film producers who always seem to over-do the bass. It's got Digital audio out, so my HiFi can deal with that issue.
From a quick look, it seems that similar quality can now be had for under £400. You can even get el cheapo 50" ones for £300! And I saw an LG 65" for £500 advertised at the weekend.
So what the hell is a 43" 'smart' one doing at £800? And one that shows a line of lights on the screen when it's supposed to be showing black?
Good Lord there's a forty-something inch Samsung for well over a grand in there. Although I suppose that's 4k, and I've no idea what they should cost, so perhaps I shouldn't criticise.
But for all those smart mid-40s inch tellies in there at £600-£800, I could buy a good 50" panel, a Chromecast (Amazon TV / Apple TV), a reasonable Android tablet or phone to control it - and have change for a decent quality sound system that also plays my CDs and stuff from my tablet. Or a surround sound setup, if I prefer movies to music.
Or the 50" decent TV, a good DVR box and less good soundbar.
And I can update my smart components as a I chose.
I was working in a non-selling call centre. And fully understood the legal requirements of what I could and couldn't say. But you are correct that I had little respect for the company, which perfectly matched their lack of respect for me. It was a shit job for a while, until something better came along. Something that management made more unpleasant than it needed to.
Better training and treating staff with some respect can do wonders. Even a small extra bit of pay, along with respect can give you enough staff retention to make decent levels of training worthwhile. For the right people. But that's not the way they chose to run the company.
Mis-selling is often the fault of management anyway. Pisspoor culture, and pushing badly trained staff too hard is far more likely to overcome the limited safety that scrips can achieve. Motivation need not be entirely financial. Admittedly you always risk bad eggs lying to boost their commission/bonuses - and monitoring is good for stopping them.
Too many managers treat their staff like shit, then whine when they aren't motivated or loyal - and use that as their excuse for what amounts to petty bullying and incompetent unrealistic target-setting.
Not only did my bank steal my soul, they also stole my face...
Call centres have been doing it for years. Because the phone are operated by a centralised computer dialler, and everyone is inputting data on a system linked to it, they've got huge amounts of data available. So it's just down to how much management can be arsed to use it, and how Nazi they are.
The difference with call centres is that their staff turnover is huge, and it takes a while to train people up, so you really have to try to get sacked. The problem is the piss-poor management bullying people, but if you didn't give a fuck (like me) and were willing to sit through the odd telling off by a supervisor with delusions of adequacy, then it was no problem.
They listen into your calls to make sure you stick to the stupid script ("calls may be monitored for training purposes"), they can check how long you take between calls, measure your breaks, how long you spend typing up the answers, how long you're not available to take new calls. All types of stuff.
Of course, if you don't put the phone down after the conversation has finished, it still counts as call time, so you can get the typing up time down to zero, when they're chasing that metric. Bit hard on the people whose line you're tying up of course.
The only time our company ever took it totally seriously is when they made everyone redundant. Then they got HR in to do lots of monitoring. I'm sure the excuse was so that people wouldn't start causing trouble as they were being dumped. But actually it was so they could sack people, and avoid the tiny redundancy payouts they were having to make. I seem to remember I got a verbal warning in that process, and they managed to progress a couple of people to final written warnings, but there wasn't enough time to get away with actually sacking people before the month was up.
And to think I was just about to start doing database work for them, I'd already had the training, so I missed out on a career in IT and ended up in water engineering instead.
Ground wind violation this time.
Some of mine have been pretty loud, say the morning after curry with real ale. But no-ones ever cancelled a rocket launch on my account...
If you're coming down from orbit, then you'll be going just a bit less than orbital velocity of 17,500 mph.
Earth escape velocity is about 25,000 mph. That's what you need in order to get to the Moon or Mars. As it takes lots of fuel to get that, it's too difficult to carry enough to slow down much on the way back. Hence you brake using the atmosphere.
From memory you only pull about 3G on normal re-entry, whereas the astronauts returning from the Moon had to put up with something like 6. And Apollo 13 was more, because they got the entry angle slightly wrong.
Obviously you want to go to Mars as quickly as possible, so there's a balance between how much you accelerate to speed up the trip, how much fuel you can take to slow down - and how much pain you're willing to put up with on aerobraking. I guess this is another reason that they want to take their Earth re-entry craft with them all the way to Mars, as it woulld take too much fuel to be able to slow back down to orbital velocity and rendevous with one (the craft may be lighter than the fuel otherwise needed). Also the Orion is a lifeboat, as you can abort directly to Earth if the rest of the Mars ship breaks down. NASA presumably decided the AA were too expensive...
Dragon2 is designed to land on land. So re-using that ought to be a lot easier than something that splashes down in nasty, salty seawater. Especially if the astronauts have to blow a hatch, and the thing gets water inside it.
There are no Twixes. My colleague just phoned about a minute ago to say Boots do not sell them, so my request for lunchtime chocolate was denied.
So I've gone to SpaceX. I'm having a Double Decker, which is how they've designed the cabin for Dragon 2. With the pilots sitting in the pointy bit above the rest of the crew.
We had Janet & John. And boy were they dull...
I suspect my reading was only rescued by Willard Price's animal Adventure books. Hal & Roger are exploited by their parents as cheap (and very under-aged) labour in very dangerous jobs. But instead of going to social services, end up populating their father's zoo with animals, while avoiding kidnappers, murderers, or just getting eaten.
Factors affecting this are probably rather complicated. In my case it's having something like 5% of average visual accuity that buggers me up. Although weirdly the audio ones are even harder, and I've got good ears. I suspect that a matching photos one will present as many difficutties for me, as the obscured text one - it could be like doing a spot-the-difference puzzle.
Then again people with dyslexia often find that they can read much more easily by putting an orange plastic filter over black text on white. This suggests to me that there are some complicated factors involved in how our brains work on reading. So I wonder if a different way of wobbling/obscuring the letters might be more or less readable by humans. Given that our brains are set up to do pattern recognition.
If it takes you 3 tries, and "today’s artificial intelligence technology can solve even the most difficult variant of distorted text at 99.8 per cent accuracy" - then does that mean you're actually not a human?
I'm wondering the same. I always thought I was, but I've never been able to get my Captcha ratio much above 1 in 3 either. So does that mean I'm some sub-standard part of the Matrix?
Good point. Although I've not used Linux before, and haven't touched UNIX since the mid-90s. So I'd imagine it would be a bit of a learning curve getting back into it. I did consider it, but then £30 for a Pi, say £100 more for a case, hard drive and power supply (plus whatever a TV tuner card would cost) meant I was thinking I might as well spend £250 on something small and a bit more powerful. That meant research and setup that I hadn't got time (or couldn't be arsed) to do, then I thought "stuff it" and blew £30 on a Chromecast.
You'd have to have a heart of stone not to laugh...
They are doing some stuff. EU VAT rules have just been changed. Actually that's the most recent, there was something done last year to stop the Channel Islands VAT avoidance dodge.
Also at the EU level there are changes being proposed to the way companies can move revenue around inside the single market. I think there's enough will that these will actually amount to something.
There have also been international moves (since just before the financial crisis hit) to cut some of the worst tax avasion via international banking tax havens. The crisis gave those moves quite a bit more bite.
For most of this stuff we have to negotiate very slowly at EU level, unless we choose to pull out of the EU - as lots of this stuff is covered under the Single Market. The idea being that you can set up in one country, then trade throughout the whole EU. This is good for the European economy as a whole, but has lead to certain countries being a little too eager to nick everyone else's VAT and Corporation Tax receipts. That'll probably never go away entirely, but will be (and is being) reigned in quite a lot.
Punishing big companies is easy. They're a huge target. They can't hide easily. Fines don't care if the bit of the corporate structure they're levied on is making paper profits or not.
Taxing them is much harder, as they can move the money and profits around within a maze of small targets. Plus there's competition for the jobs they offer, which incentivises loophole creation.
The difference is the multi-nationals are actively trying to avoid paying tax. But they're also actively trying to attract the money from companies and consumers in the EU jurisdiction. That gives the power to us, rather than them. With tax, it's the other way round.
All the dystopian science fiction about the corporations taking over neglects a few things. They want our money. They need our money. Populations have successfully revolted against violent and repressive armed governments in the past - and will do so in future.
In the end there are more of us than there are of them. And we have pitchforks.
Again, corporations are only rich because lots of people are giving them lots of money. Who's got the money, us consumers. If they want to continue getting our money, they have to stop us from actively boycotting them. Our governments can also totally screw them over. They can tax them, they can arrest their executives, or if they flee to another jurisdiction, they can prevent them getting our money by telling the banks not to transact with them.
This is how the USA and EU can bring crippling sanctions onto countries like Iran and Russia, without full global or UN cooperation or agreement. Even just the US and UK between them control a huge chunk of the world's banking, insurance and other financial services.
Or remember when Wikileaks suddently weren't getting any credit card payments. That didn't even take legislation.
You're certainly right about the change. Society can't keep up with changes this fast. Legislation doesn't move that fast either. So not many people have even formed a solid opinion on what the internet should and should not do.
But there's no problem with legislating for Google. Sure it's a huge multi-national. But it makes tens of billions of dollars of sales in Europe per year. And those sales are for advertising to European customers. In the end the EU can control that revenue stream (at least to some extent), and that gives it control over Google.
It's still possible to set up in a different jurisdiction and shout "ya boo sucks to you EU", and publish what you want. So long as it's legal where you are. And so long as you have no financial or physical ties to the jurisidction you're ignoring the laws of, you'll be safe. But Google are about the money, and the EU is a market of half a billion of some of the richest people in the world.
In my personal opinion, some aspects of the internet are currently under-regulated / under-governed. The chances are that that will change gradually. Knowing how society tends to work, I suspect that we may be heading for over-regulating it, and then the pendulum will swing back to a better balance somewhere in between.
Which one is best, Orlowski or Worstall? There's only one way to decide... FFFIIIIIIGGGGHHHHTTTTTT!!!!!!!
I've tried most whiskies that I like both straight, and with a little water. My current favourite is Balvenie, which I take neat (although it does taste different with water). I find that the peatier ones benefit from a small splash of water, as it seems to bring some of the sweeter flavours out past the smokiness.
I've got a bottle of cask strength 18 year old which needs water, as at 65% alcohol it physically hurts the side of your tongue if you don't swallow it almost immediately. Giving you little time to actually taste the stuff - which rather defeats the object.
So it's horses for courses. Others prefer the peatier ones, and take them neat.
There's nothing wrong with adding water to whisky. That's a sensible thing to do. Some taste nicer with a drop of water. I can't remember trying a single whisky both ways, where even just a splash of water doesn't make a noticeable (to large) difference to the taste. Some I prefer with, others without.
The problem with ice is cold, not wet. Chilling whisky destroys most of the flavour. Or at least turns it off until you warm it up again.
So what they've done is to remove any possible good aspects of what ice can do to whisky, and kept only the bad effects. That's magic! The fact that he's asking for start-up funding to make something that's already been available for years, is just icing on the cake of pointlessness.
Oh. I'm disappointed. I thought you meant a carriage where we could murder people. Would certainly reduce over-crowding...
I guess that would create its own problems though. After all, the queue for the murdering Piers Morgan carriage would be huge.
I think the main issue with Bedford -> Cambridge is that the old line has been built over, and so it's tricky to know where to route it.
If we can get Mog_X to get his bloody bike out of the way, we'll be sorted...
Aren't they already doing this?
The Chiltern Railways line is being hooked up to Oxford via Bicester at the moment. Then once this is done, they're re-activating the line between Oxford and Bedord.
A quick Google later: link to project
Turns out they've only got funding and approval for the Aylesbury-Oxford-MK-Bedford bit so far. It would seem a bit illogical not to then continue it, as new infrastructure appears to be in fashion again politically, and this route has already covered 2/3rds of the distance.
Also, why more transport links for a hub at King's Cross. It's already easy to get trains to Paddington from Oxford, and Liverpool Street from Cambridge. Surely it's not beyond the wit of our putative tech-pioneers to get a tube and meet in the middle at King's Cross. Or even walk...
Hell if things get too desperate, there are even buses.
I apologize for adding a serious comment to your query, but I value mt epidermal integrity highly, since I'm allergic to harpoons.
What a wuss! What's a little pain, compared with having the shiniest smartphone?
Anyway, I'm sure you exaggerate. I doubt you're really allergic to harpoons. Just harpoon intolerant...
Why not use harpoons? It worked for Philae. After all that bounced so high, it took 2 hours to come down again...
Oh, hang on. I think I've got that wrong. OK, how about it harpoons your leg, and avoids bounceage that way. I'm sure none of us would mind a small leg wound, in order to save our precious mobiles.
Though maybe using conventional launchers for its parts and lighting the blue touch paper in LEO would be more acceptable.
Isn't that the wrong way round? Wasn't one idea for Orion that you could get some really stonkingly heavy stuff into orbit as a one-off, or at least not-too-often exercise. So you could launch space-factories, space-mining rigs or habitats as huge launches, and then do everything else with normal rockets.
Obviously it's also a faster way round the solar system. But I'd have thought it would be too heavy to lift by normal means. After all, you need a really thick baseplate and some serious shock absorbers.
That's interesting, I'd not read about that as a radiation shielding option. I'd imagine that still puts our ship in the range of 10-20 launches (including, consumables, flight and assembly crews) - so the Earth-to-orbit costs alone are going to be somewhere between $5bn and $20bn.
Although hopefully this will be a re-usable asset.
I don't think your solution works. We simply don't have the technology to build anything in space. And we're not even close. The ISS was assembled, but mostly that was just bolting big stuff together. Plus a bit of plumbing. So everything on the main ship that drives to Mars is going to be built in modules on Earth, then lifted to orbit. So in order to have heavy shielding we're going to have use an absurdly large number of launches to get it up there, and then huge amounts of time doing the final assembly in orbit.
I agree that some sort of electric plasma engine is probably the way to go, and it would seem sensible to spend money on our big ship, as it can be continually refurbished and reused. Even if you had to launch another engine module from Earth every time it came back here, rather than trying to refurb the old one.
However, one of the arguments from the article is to use the Orion capsule as a lifeboat. If it can cope with high velocities for landing, then you might have a viable emergency return home option. If something horrible goes wrong with the main ship on the way to Mars, or even the way back, nothing is likely to be able to carry the fuel to decelerate you to Earch orbital speed so you can rendevouz with a landing craft. But being less massive than the main ship, you might be able to get within a sane speed to survive aeorbraking. Now it's possible that a Dragon 3 could do this as well, but I believe Dragon 2 is only designed for orbital re-entry speeds. Although Dragon ought to be a better bet for landing on Mars, as it's designed to land on dry land on its jets.
I think my idea would be to have several multi-purpose craft for all the landings, then a ship to do the long-haul bit that carries them and their fuel between planets. So a bigger Dragon, with better radiation shielding, and better heat shields. That way you've got more options if things go wrong. But it might make more sense to have separate Mars landers.
However I'm not sure Mars is the right question. It seems to me we need fuel and consumables. So capturing an asteroid seems a far better long term plan. That also saves a lot of the difficulties of landing on Mars. Although if we could use Mars as an excuse to build a ship to get us around the solar system, then I guess it would be a good first step.
OK. But only if they launch it from your back garden. And no cheating and going out when they launch either...
What it seems to amount to is that this is the only way down, while we're launching stuff into space from Earth. One of the best reasons to go grab an asteroid and mine it, would be to get consumables like water/amonia/whatever. In orbit you've got virtually free electricity from your solar panels, so if you've got chemicals then you can get oxygen to breathe, water to drink (and grow plants) and nitrogen for atmosphere and fertilizer. If you've got water and electricity you've also got hydrogen and oxygen - i.e. rocket fuel.
If we could just get that sort of bulky stuff in space, rather than boosting it up from earth, then all sorts of things in space become much more feasible. As well as a lot less expensive, and a bit less dangerous. At that point we could have re-usable spaceplanes that refuel in orbit and can then slow down from orbital speeds before entering the atmosphere. Some horrific percentage of the shuttle's weight was heat-shield, and an even more horrific percentage was fuel.
We have these fundamental design problems that dog everything that we do. All the weight you carry up from earth must be accelerated to orbital speeds (17,500 mph ish). And the more you carry, the more fuel you need to launch it, and the more fuel you carry, the more fuel you need to lift that fuel. Which is why we mostly throw away bits of our rockets on the way up. And of course, to come back down, you have to lose that 17,500 mph somehow. Currently that's by aerobraking.
Now you could do like aeroplanes, and use lift to help get you up to a good height, before heading for space, but even then you need rockets for once you run out of atmosphere. And then you have to carry these, plus your jets, plus fuel for both, and a heat shield, as you can't carry enough fuel to slow down.
So Virgin's (Scaled Composite's really) design is to use well understood jet technology to carry their space plane to 50,000 feet. That saves loads of weight, and hassle. Then the spaceplane does the rest. Currently they're just after sub-orbital joyrides - but I presume they can also carry a smaller rocket to boost a satellite, instead of passengers with another design. I don't know if you can make a big enough carrier plane to carry a space vehicle with the weight of fuel and shielding to get a useful payload to orbit. But I'd be surprised if that's not possible.
Option 2 is what SpaceX are doing. Make rockets cheaper. No-one's seriously done re-designs on this stuff since the 60s/70s. So they dumped horrible chemicals or hard to handle liquid hydrogen. Instead they're using liquid oxygen and kerosene. Nice money saving. Then they're planning to land the first stage of their rockets instead of dumping them. So you carry a little more fuel, then land them and re-use.
Third is Reaction Engines. They're the old HOTOL lot, still going, but now Skylon. Use a SABRE engine that works like a jet at low speeds, then gets up to supersonic RAMJET speeds, and then will have to use stored oxygen once the atmosphere's too thin.
Oh, and there's an XKCD for everything apparently: linky
Not forgetting Van Halen's jockstrap and Lily Allen's
...radio interference LOS...
The ISS is a perfectly reasonable thing for a space program to fund. It may be bloody expensive, particularly compared with what $100 bn-odd would buy in robot missions over 30 years, but if we want to have a permanent manned space habitat in future then we need to do this stuff. There's still loads of research to do on space medicine and life support. Also we've gained, and are still gaining, useful experience in orbital construction (another vital area). After all, I believe nobody had even come close to drowning in space before last year...
The ISS is doing several very useful things. Fostering international space cooperation, and building a larger group of experienced space-trained people is pretty important for enabling a private space industry. ISS has given us SpaceX (maybe it would have happened without that seed money, but not this quickly), and SpaceX are in my opinion the single most important thing to happen in the space industry so far this century. They give a real hope that space won't remain a hobby for major governments. If we want stuff to happen in space, including cheaper research, it'll only happen when it becomes more accessible, and that will only come when it's cheaper. Also Improving our ability to assemble stuff in space, as well as keep people alive long-term (as above).
That's not to mention another vital job the ISS did, and probably one of the reasons it got funding out of Congress at all. Which was keeping the Russian space program going after the Soviet Union collapsed, which had two purposes. One was to try to build a more friendly relationship with Russia. The other was to stop their missile/rocket scientists from going onto the freelance market, and turning up in inconvenient places like Iran and North Korea.
Oddly enough it's considered more sporting to send up all manned capsules empty on their first run nowadays. It's this pesky health'n'safety thing you see.
Also any probe you send outside the van Allen belts to test what the shielding on a modern capsule is good for pretty much might as well be a capsule. Particularly as this is a double test, in that you want the eccentric orbit to get extra speed to test the heat shield anyway. So while you're outside the protection of the magnetic field anyway, you may as well do a little testing.
Anyway how long will the Russians be willing to share Soyuz? Or even be able to fund it? The contract is only to 2018 (from memory). Relations are not good, and look to be worsening.
Apparently Roscosmos are now unable to set a budget, as with sanctions and recession, plus the massive drop in both the oil price and the Rouble, the Russian budget has all gone to crap. As I recall it, something like 35% of the government income is based on oil/gas revenues. So when the oil price drops by 40% in a few months, and they can only borrow at 10% (worse than Greece), something will have to give in their budget. linky
That article seenms a bit over the top, would be interesting to see what it said in the original Izvestia one. Also the ISS partners pay in dollars for their trips, so Roscosmos will actually make more money on those as the Rouble falls.
Oi! I resemble that remark! I had a CPC464 with colour screen and tape deck.
10 PRINT "goldcd SMELLS OF POO!"
20 GOTO 10
If it's a true clone, it'll start shipping in July at the earliest.
Which year would that be?
It's a bit like sausages - buy them from a good butcher and they are a world apart from the vile factory produced rubbish sold in supermarkets even under their "best of" brands, that appear to be solely made from udder, rectum, ears, lips, eyeballs, cartilage and sinew, dyed pink and injected into a twisted garden hose.
I'd heard sausages were made out of that too. But personally, I think it's just bollocks...
I saw one of them telly chefs do that. I think it was Raymond Blanc (who otherwise seems to be a sensible chap), putting best steak into a kate & sidney pudding. Given it's going to get seared, then steamed for over 3 hours - I really don't know why he was wasting his time doing that. Plus you want something with a bit of fat in it, to make a nicer gravy.
I'm inspired to have a go now. Since I've started making bread, I'm hoping that my (long neglected) pastry skills will have improved. So I think I should have another go.
There's nothing wrong with not serving the best meat in pies. And actually a reasonable gravy content is important, as you need some nice liquid to go with the pastry. Although you don't want gristle or the nasty bits of kidneys hiding in there. Even if it is a right bugger when you have to trim it off - something I have to do regularly as a frequent maker of the superior steak and kidney pudding.
However poor quality of meat is a sign that you shouldn't be going back to a place. Because their product is crap. Whereas non-pie-ness is an all too common problem which the market does not appear to be able to solve. Hence we need government regulation to force compliance with reasonable standards.
A proper pie is a lovely thing to eat. But also a bit of a hassle to make. Therefore it's the sort of thing that we invented restaurants for. So they can do the buggering about, greasing, rolling, shaping, blind baking, filling, sealing etc. I always end up squashing my pastry flat, and turning it into biscuits. Which is why I've resorted to the more forgiving steamed pudding.
I suppose we need to add another exception for cobblers, or whatever you call it when you stretch dough across the top of a casserole and bake it. Actually I think they might be two different (delicious) things. They're really nice, and easy to eat, as you rip off some bread and dip it in the gravy Not like those awful puff pastry hats, that so many places foist on us.
Surely that depends on the pie? I know that the cornish pasty had what was effectively an inedible pastry handle to hold it by with dirty hands. That was the bit you left - but the rest of the pastry was supposed to be eaten. I'd imagine similar things being true elsewhere. When you're trying to feed people who're taking their meal to work, then you need something to keep it in. But if you're cooking for home, you'd not want to be wasting any ingredients. It's not like flour and fat was lying around just to be thrown away!
Edible plates were the thing, back in the day. So you might serve stew on a trencher of bread, which you eat to mop up the gravy. I'd be amazed if a pie was much different.
Don't worry, El Reg got the details wrong. The probe won't be landing, but staying at a safe distance. It will launch its
nuke small charge - then drop mobile infantry, who'll go down to kill all the bugs take samples, then (any survivors) return to the craft, and come back to earth. There's absolutely nothing to worry about.
Sod a new Elite (although I'm interested in that too), I want a modern version of Tie Fighter!