Jump to content

razark

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,340

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by razark

  1. razark
    A. I hope not, I like my paycheck. B. Put me under DoD and their budget? I hope so, I like my paycheck! Point it one way, it's a telescope. Point it the other, and you're reading newspapers in Moscow DPRK Baghdad Pyongyang Tehran Beijing <insert random US city here>. NASA and Star Fleet I mean Space Force would have very different foci. NASA may be outdated1, but it will not be replaced by a military branch. 1We have a space exploration program. That is, and should be, NASA's mission. What we need is a (civilian) Space Exploitation Program.
  2. razark
    Thanks for the clarification. Mistakes happen, but if they were saying this was a deliberate act, on top of the Soyuz hole, it would be very alarming.
  3. razark

    Shower thoughts

    razark replied to p1t1o's topic in The Lounge

    I'm not sure what you're saying here. Do birds produce milk? Complaint: I'm tired. I'm drunk. I need to get up for work in five hours. I can't sleep.
  4. razark
    Due to the imperfections of translations and the bourbon, this (and the headline) sounds a bit accusatory. Are they saying this was an accidental incident, or a deliberate act?
  5. razark
    I remember when my parents called to let me know my childhood dog was going to be put down. I used to have a picture of her with my oldest child. For some reason, that's one of the few picture frames my wife decided to take when she left. <insert words the mods won't let me use>
  6. razark
    Haven't seen this thread in a while. It really brings back memories...
  7. razark
    So does saying "We're still considering it.", or "We're working on it, but we're not promising it.", or "We don't think it's going to work now, but we're open to revisiting it at a later time.". It's not either/or. "Maybe" is always a possibility.
  8. razark
    He designed the orbiter UHF system back in the '70s.
  9. razark
    I'll try to remember to ask my father if he knows the range on his EVA UHF system.
  10. razark
    My father is the engineer. Mostly my colleague complains how much he hates Java and Adobe. I tell him at least he's not taking a class on assembly language. L and p I'm not seeing listed. (I minored in geology, not physics. There's a lot I would change if I could go through school again.) Anyway, I'm willing to accept that there is a reason for the definition, even if I don't understand it right now.
  11. razark
    Yeah, but I'm in IT, not one of the "fun" areas. I'll try and do so tomorrow, once the whiskey wears off. Is there a source that defines the variables?
  12. razark
    How firm it this limit? Is this the starting conditions, the ending conditions, or does this limit encompass the entire operating time? It's amazing how cheap materials can be if someone just happens to have them "laying around" in the garage. I mean, who's to say someone doesn't have a short length of pipe, some wheels, and a bit of lumber in the garage that they're willing to "sell" for $20?
  13. razark
    But why is that 100 km? That seems a bit too convenient to me, that the altitude at which lift becomes meaningless is a nice round number. Besides, isn't lift a result of vehicle design? Does that mean a rock is in space at 1 km? (See my previous response. It's a good definition, since it's based on physics and not just "magic numbers". I'm just not sure why it is what it is. Is this some theoretical maximum at which lift for any vehicle requires a higher speed? What if someone demonstrated a vehicle that did provide enough lift at 110 km? Would the definition change?)
  14. razark
    So, the point stands, that it really is an arbitrary definition, and "space" depends on who you accept as the authority? Edit: The best definition I've heard is "the altitude at which the speed a vehicle achieves enough aerodynamic lift to stay aloft exceeds the orbital velocity". That seems like a reasonable definition, based on physics, and not an arbitrary altitude. However, I've always seen that attached to the 100 km altitude, and I'm not entirely sure why.
  15. razark
    And who gave them the authority to decide, rather than the USAF?
  16. razark
    The sleeper must awaken! We have wormsign the likes of which even god has never seen!
  17. razark
    @SQUAD: Just answer the damn question and end the speculation. Is multiplayer dead, or still on the table?
  18. razark
    Is that something Squad has control over now? Or would merchandising rights fall under Take Two's purchase?
  19. razark
    Ah. I'm not up on Soyuz technology. I figured the same (or at least the same type) thrusters would be used for attitude control prior to and during re-entry.
  20. razark
    Is it needed for undocking and deorbiting, though?
  21. razark
    I passed the exam for my General class ham radio license.
  22. razark
    True. ISS is decades ahead in technology.
  23. razark
    Not to mention that Skylab was left unmanned between missions. One of the early Shuttle missions was planned to reboost Skylab, as well. Further missions were envisioned, but the program was delayed. If it had happened, it would have been a five-year unoccupied wait before a crew could return.
  24. razark
    Is SAS preventing the plane from turning when it banks?
  25. razark
    What happens if you try using it?
×
×
  • Create New...