antubbs

7 ms·

1.
by antubbs 10y ago
Eh. e.g. the north atlantic tracks have been around since the 1960s. GPS wasn't available to the public until Korean Air Lines Flight 007 in the 1980s.
2.
by antubbs 10y ago
With the disclaimer that I have no idea what I'm doing and there are probably many flaws in this reasoning: A metric ton of bunker is about $300 ( http://shipandbunker.com/prices ) The same volume of diesel would be abou
3.
by antubbs 10y ago
Newer ships aren't necessarily much better. Mærsk's E class container ships still burn bunker fuel. The Triple E Class made improvements in efficiency and emissions, but are still burning bunker fuel at about 50% of the emissions
4.
by antubbs 10y ago
The 747 is certainly iconic, but I hate to be the one to tell you that 747 production may be coming to an end as the industry has zero interest in inefficient four-engine jets. Basically no interest in the passenger or freighter model at th
5.
by antubbs 11y ago
The hilarious thing is that the KC-46 is basically a means of keeping the Boeing 767 production line open and operating and producing airplanes even though Boeing has replaced it with the 777 and 787 for commercial customers. They may be ne
6.
by antubbs 11y ago
Pretty much. The B-1 was designed for a role (low altitude nape of the earth bombing) that was obsolete before they worked out the bugs in the jet (Russian interceptor and fighter aircraft got look-down shoot-down capability). The B-1 was k
7.
by antubbs 11y ago
There have never been very many operational Tu-160 bombers in service. The Tu-160 is focused on the standoff weapon role, and is ideally meant to delivering tactical ordinance while enemy air defense is still in effect. Standoff weapons are
8.
by antubbs 12y ago
The shuttle's promise (inexpensive frequent launches) never materialized. Instead it was an incredibly complicated and expensive system to operate, launch, service, and recover. SpaceX's approach is to take the approach that'
9.
by antubbs 12y ago
There's been Russian military use of grid fins on supersonic rockets and missiles for many decades. It's my understanding that supersonic flow is not a problem, rather transonic (mercifully a relatively short period on either an a
10.
by antubbs 12y ago
It's a launch platform without clear future missions or funding. After the surplus RS-25 engines from the shuttle program are used (designed to be re-usable, they are heavy and expensive and will be destroyed by the launches) it's
11.
by antubbs 12y ago
I guess this is my concern as well. I'm not sure what the need is for the shiny new object in this case; I've never felt limited by Vim, but perhaps there are particular features or capabilities that the author is interested in?
12.
by antubbs 12y ago
I'm not sure it makes sense to assume that all launch companies want to scale up and build vastly bigger rockets. SpaceX did it to go after the CRS launches, and now onto larger commercial/military payloads. Their endgame was neve
13.
by antubbs 12y ago
I don't think it is accurate to suggest that this company is competing with SpaceX. It is accurate that SpaceX is trying to provide lower-cost launch capability and it is accurate that SpaceX is trying to make parts of its launch vehic
14.
by antubbs 13y ago
So, it's certainly happened: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_satellite_collision I'm nowhere near talented enough to talk in terms of "odds" with respect to satellite collisions, but it's wor
15.
by antubbs 13y ago
Can't speak to the plan for the second stage (which will do a once-around and de-orbit if I understand correctly), but the first stage will not be following a ballistic trajectory and re-entry like a normal suborbital launch. Its goal
16.
by antubbs 13y ago
The assumption with the F-35 seems to be that technology (better sensors & automation) will overcome performance & armament disparities. This is not a new assumption in the air superiority game, but I don't think history's
17.
by antubbs 13y ago
To their credit, the F-117 also wasn't a multirole fighter, was built in low quantities, wasn't planned for export uses, and was relatively quickly retired. It's a one-trick pony designed to sneak in, drop a precision bomb, a
18.
by antubbs 13y ago
Range, thrust, and power to weight are just a few performance parameters. It's somewhat more difficult to get accurate turn performance and acceleration information about the F-35. If I understand correctly (again, can't really fi
19.
by antubbs 13y ago
This is more conjecture, but I don't think this is so much a capability problem (they're already mounting stingers on drones; larger models with large electronic sensor platforms/radar and sidewinder/amraams are just a m
20.
by antubbs 13y ago
Gotta be careful about history; when the F-35 program started, drone-based warfare was pretty infantile. Drone payloads are still relatively light compared to heavily-laden fighter-bombers (or indeed outright bombers). This will likely evol
21.
by antubbs 13y ago
I don't believe this is accurate. The F-16 is the "low" part of the "high/low" multirole fighter strategy. For the air force, the "high" jet is the F-15. The F-22 is predominantly designed for air sup
22.
Taxes & Leverage(latentcontent.net)
1 points by antubbs 13y ago|0 comments
23.
by antubbs 14y ago
I think that's been beaten to death with http://www.quora.com/Engineering-Management/Why-are-software...
24.
Fictional Plumbing Problems As A Tortured Analogy For Software Engineering(latentcontent.net)
19 points by antubbs 14y ago|16 comments
25.
by antubbs 15y ago
It seems like the thesis is that C++ is a more complicated language, and therefore the code produced in it is more complicated and harder to comprehend. This line of reasoning is specious.
26.
by antubbs 15y ago
I had the same gut reaction when I saw the headline, but concur -- the article makes it clear that this is a move to adjust when the same material is presented, not the introduction of new advertisements in the program. As a consumer of suc