|
tbh if elon digs a pit to hell, im gonna chuckle and then check if my bunny is okay
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 03:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 21:24 |
|
|
There are a Tesla thread or two on SA if anyone is interested. Last I saw, this one in CSPAM was talking about the latest liens filed against Tesla. Including from a tent company and the LAFD. Fake edit: It moved on broken things, people fighting to charge a car, and Tesla releasing Q3 results in a few days. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3862673
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 04:12
|
|
|
Not sure where the "Hyperloop has to be buried" thing came from, but the original proposal it was always intended to be built above grade and suspended like oil pipelines as the thought was it's easier to get right of way when the land underneath is still mostly usable (compared to high speed rail). Remember that this is against the backdrop of the california highspeed rail project that is having a helluva time securing right of ways. And yeah, when we routinely build oil pipeline that runs anywhere from 500psi to 1500psi, I think we can figure out how to handle 14.7 psi pointing the other direction.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 04:37
|
|
|
Most oil pipelines are buried though?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 04:43
|
|
|
wkarma posted:Not sure where the "Hyperloop has to be buried" thing came from The more recent stuff about a DC to NY hyperloop with Musk and Trump references underground tunnels and the Boring Company. I’d be surprised if you could condemn enough buildings to ever build it above ground anywhere useful.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 05:08
|
|
|
wkarma posted:Not sure where the "Hyperloop has to be buried" thing came from, but the original proposal it was always intended to be built above grade and suspended like oil pipelines as the thought was it's easier to get right of way when the land underneath is still mostly usable (compared to high speed rail). Which circles back around to yahoos shooting up the tube; cf. 737 fuselages transported by train showing up with bullet holes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
PCjr sidecar posted:Which circles back around to yahoos shooting up the tube; cf. 737 fuselages transported by train showing up with bullet holes. beats the ones that showed up with river water rust
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 05:23
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:The more recent stuff about a DC to NY hyperloop with Musk and Trump references underground tunnels and the Boring Company. Yeah, the NE Corridor is too densely packed for an above-ground 'rail' system. Part of the reason they can't build any more roads around DC is because they waited too long and the area's at urban density now. There were plans for three concentric Beltways instead of just the one, and ever since they've been trying to fix the problem with parkways and toll roads that have really hosed up paths because they'd be too prohibitively expensive otherwise, even with forcibly kicking people out of their homes. They also played their hand 50+ years ago when they uprooted all the historically black enclaves to build monuments to corporate excess like Tyson's Corner and IAD. One place where a rail system HAD to be above ground, despite everyone pleading for it not to be - was again Tyson's Corner. There are so many ~sekret~ lines running under that place that even when they were sinking the pylons for the above-ground sections of the track, they had the trademark "Black SUVs" roll up on the construction crews several times because there are some lines "Miss Utility" doesn't tell anyone about. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 05:37 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 05:34
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:People flipped poo poo when bicycles became more popular in the 1890s. If bicyclists could actually tell the difference between a red light and a green light I wouldn't hate them so much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 05:59
|
|
|
As someone who used to take the Vermonter line from Brattleboro to Philadelphia and back on the reg, I like the idea of a hyperloop in that area to make travel way faster but otoh that region seems like even more of a logistical nightmare than building it on the west coast. How far underground would you have to dig in NYC to not hit the already existing deep tunnels? And if you say aboveground, while I'm all for levelling Western Massachusetts I don't think anyone else is willing to deal with the headache of eminent domain-ing some of the densest parts of the US. Too bad we didn't have the tech for this during the Cold War, I can see someone like Reagan funnelling in enough money to knock the Earth off its axis because someone said it was vital for national security.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 06:05
|
|
|
wkarma posted:Not sure where the "Hyperloop has to be buried" thing came from, but the original proposal it was always intended to be built above grade and suspended like oil pipelines as the thought was it's easier to get right of way when the land underneath is still mostly usable (compared to high speed rail). Elevating a line is hilariously expensive and not at all worth doing just so to claw back a little farm land.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 06:10
|
|
|
Don Gato posted:As someone who used to take the Vermonter line from Brattleboro to Philadelphia and back on the reg, I like the idea of a hyperloop in that area to make travel way faster but otoh that region seems like even more of a logistical nightmare than building it on the west coast. How far underground would you have to dig in NYC to not hit the already existing deep tunnels? And if you say aboveground, while I'm all for levelling Western Massachusetts I don't think anyone else is willing to deal with the headache of eminent domain-ing some of the densest parts of the US. And now I'm trying to figure out ways that circadian warfare might actually be economically effective...
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 06:21
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Elevating a line is hilariously expensive and not at all worth doing just so to claw back a little farm land. So is burying one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 06:40
|
|
|
Godholio posted:So is burying one. Burning the money would probably be a better use of it instead of spending it on the Hyperloop.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 06:46
|
|
|
Doctor Grape Ape posted:Burning the money would probably be a better use of it instead of spending it on the Hyperloop. Because there’s a chance that, while so-doing, Ol’ Muskelunge would fall into the fire and sustain burns severe enough to cause his death?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 06:56
|
|
|
Groda posted:That sounds like misplaced effort. The half-life of radon is so low that the radon daughters accumulating in your water while it was just sitting there in the bedrock would doubtlessly be many orders of magnitude higher than those which potentially could be produced in your body drinking highly It's not an effort since the filters we use to get other contaminants out of the water filter Radon as well without upgrades, and FWIW the lecture said there was a noticable dip in common Radon-cancers (lung and esophagus, I think) among Swedes as compared to Danes. To be fair, they actually have rocky land up there, so I guess they may get more of both radon and other radioactive isotopes up there than us.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 08:21
|
|
|
FWIW, The Boring Company (Musk's hyperloop venture) is a subsidiary of SpaceX. Given his well established history of going after subsidies, I wouldn't be surprised whatsoever if this vaporware and he knows it. But if he can net a few hundred million from various government entities in the process, why not. That said, I'll let an investigative journalist do the legwork on this one. That's just my guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 08:31
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:Well, Amtrak can't make Union Station in DC or Penn Station in NYC as smooth as an airline terminal. If you're taking the train from DC to NYC you have to line up at least 30 minutes before the train is due, and can't wait on the platform for it like in every other train system in the entire world. At Penn Station you stand around in a giant crowd and hope you're somewhat near to the right escalator that they call 10 minutes before each train arrives. I'm almost at the point where I'd rather fly that take the train for that trip. This was my first experience with US trains (I'm Australian) and I thought it was all like that and assumed that was why everyone hates trains in the US. It was extremely bad, I've been through airports with less hassle. Baggage on the train was a total nightmare too. Interesting to know that that is an exception, and amtrak is less poo poo elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 09:37
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:FWIW, The Boring Company (Musk's hyperloop venture) is a subsidiary of SpaceX. Given his well established history of going after subsidies, I wouldn't be surprised whatsoever if this vaporware and he knows it. But if he can net a few hundred million from various government entities in the process, why not. The government made very well known that it had satellites that needed launching, tax credits for solar and tax credits for electric cars. What did it do for holes in the ground?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 10:59
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:The government made very well known that it had satellites that needed launching, tax credits for solar and tax credits for electric cars. What did it do for holes in the ground? I mean, Trump is kicking off another arms race? People need bomb shelters and the government needs missile silos, that's gotta count for something? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 11:01
|
|
|
Thread relevant: this company, wants to put a nuclear reactor powered satellite tug in space where the conops are that they’d leave it up there to tow satellites. http://atomosnuclear.com/ I imagine the DOEs response will be “what? No.” Any chance they could do it? Have there ever been test reactors launched before? CarForumPoster fucked around with this message at 11:22 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 11:19
|
|
|
The Soviet Union put reactors in space. One of them reentered over Canada and made some people sad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 11:23
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:The Soviet Union put reactors in space. Mods, plz AIRPOWER/Cold War: The Soviet Union put reactors in space. One of them reentered over Canada and made some people sad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 11:43
|
|
Tias posted:Mods, plz 
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 11:48
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Lead, too. Lead and ethanol serve entirely different purposes in fuel, it’s not an either/or thing. Lead was put in gasoline back in the day because the valves and valve seats in older engines weren’t hardened as much as they are now and the lead in the fuel actually acted as a cushion between them, increasing engine longevity immensely.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 12:59
|
|
|
Hauldren Collider posted:If bicyclists could actually tell the difference between a red light and a green light I wouldn't hate them so much. Again, I know this will sound weird, but moronic bike haters will cuss out bicyclists when they stop for red lights. Like scream and yell at you for having the loving gall to stop on their road for a red light, point at the sidewalk, or simply run into you because they’re too loving dumb or angry to notice or care about a bicycle. Bicyclists don’t have poo poo on how bad drivers are and are less dangerous. And most drivers incensed by bicyclists are only incensed because they are lovely dumb drivers and project their failures on others.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 13:05
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:Well, Amtrak can't make Union Station in DC or Penn Station in NYC as smooth as an airline terminal. If you're taking the train from DC to NYC you have to line up at least 30 minutes before the train is due, and can't wait on the platform for it like in every other train system in the entire world. At Penn Station you stand around in a giant crowd and hope you're somewhat near to the right escalator that they call 10 minutes before each train arrives. I'm almost at the point where I'd rather fly that take the train for that trip. At New York Penn just use one of the staircases from the LIRR or NJT areas. If you go down the stairs in the middle of the Amtrak area you end up in a corridor with access to all the tracks and without ticket checkers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 13:50
|
|
|
And looks like Belgium is on the F-35 train. And a boring F-35 first: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ti_QOyYyUG0
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 14:20
|
|
|
Realistically it was the only option. All of their 16AM neighbors are already getting airframes let alone part of the program, and as stated they wanted more interoperability in NATO stuff, not less. Not exactly an open contract.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
Somewhere on a relevant subreddit I wondered aloud why you couldn't just bring a M-2 Bradley through a Stargate to shoot aliens (since it would fit with help from a ramp). Someone responded saying "Because it's bad" with a link to The Pentagon Wars which to my knowledge is not only regarding a version of a Bradley that was still under developed, but as a result of the events in the film, was redeveloped to not have the same deathtrap qualities the film pointed out and the one accepted and deployed with the army is basically not the same vehicle. Someone else then proceeded to butt in, claimed to be an operator, said it was not up to the task against a near peer force (?), claimed it's a death trap and not as good as the Namers or Skorpion (Isn't the Namers from 2008 and the Skorpion *not* the same role as the Bradley?). I went and googled and found a CSR Report stating that the Bradley performed well in Iraq. Is the Bradley a good vehicle for its role as a IFV/AFV? My understanding is it at least does the mission the US Army intended for it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:01
|
|
|
The Namer isn’t an APC, it’s a godamned fortress on tracks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:12
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:The Soviet Union put reactors in space. So did we. It eventually shed a bunch of debris all over LEO. Which at least is marginally less-populated than Canada. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAP-10A Terrible Robot posted:Lead was put in gasoline back in the day because the valves and valve seat in older engines weren’t hardened as much as they are now and the lead in the fuel actually acted as a cushion between them, increasing engine longevity immensely. Again, with this. Where does this come from? Lead was put into gasoline as an octane booster. That was what the research effort that adopted it was looking for, and that is what it was literally patented for. Midgely and Kettering were not looking for something to protect valve seats. Phanatic fucked around with this message at 15:29 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:21
|
|
|
Yeah I'm thinking there has got to be some sort of catch as to why the army probably wouldn't want the Namer even if they could have a domestically designed and produced something comparable. They're about the same top speed; so I imagine the Namer might not be well suited for Fulda Gap scenarios.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:21
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Somewhere on a relevant subreddit I wondered aloud why you couldn't just bring a M-2 Bradley through a Stargate to shoot aliens (since it would fit with help from a ramp). Someone responded saying "Because it's bad" with a link to The Pentagon Wars which to my knowledge is not only regarding a version of a Bradley that was still under developed, but as a result of the events in the film, was redeveloped to not have the same deathtrap qualities the film pointed out and the one accepted and deployed with the army is basically not the same vehicle. The Bradley is a very successful design by any metric. Its development took quite a while, but that was due more to evolving requirements and doctrine more than any flaw in the design, and in any case, for a program of that size the development was relatively painless. The kit itself is still very, very good at what it was designed to do, and pretty good at doing some stuff it was never designed for. It is fast, lethal, versatile, has a reasonably good maintenance record, and is more well protected than any of its requirements called for. Its biggest drawbacks are its high profile, the ever-increasing weight, and the odd number of dudes it can carry. It is getting kind of long in the tooth and can't really be meaningfully upgraded anymore, so it is probably nearing the end of its useful life. It is a pretty good testament to its quality that it hasn't really been clearly bested yet by any more modern design. The K21 (ROKA) and Type 04 (PLAGF) are broadly comparable but not significant upgrades despite being decades-newer designs...though the K21 has a lot of potential and is really impressive. The Namers and Skorpion aren't in any way comparable vehicles...the Namer weighs as much as a tank and the Skorpion isn't an IFV. I get that Pentagon Wars kind of made it one of those things that informed every internet military expert but my goodness are there lots of better examples of Procurement Gone Wrong. Raenir Salazar posted:Yeah I'm thinking there has got to be some sort of catch as to why the army probably wouldn't want the Namer even if they could have a domestically designed and produced something comparable. They're about the same top speed; so I imagine the Namer might not be well suited for Fulda Gap scenarios. The US Army has to be expeditionary, and vehicle weight is the single most important factor in strategic mobility*. The IDF only needs to roll its behemoths into neighboring countries and or occupied territories and so does not have this limitation. It is the same reason why the US Army's rocket artillery remains stuck at 227mm while the PLAGF, for instance, has some absolute behemoth rocket artillery systems that completely outclass comparable US systems. * the first rule of the Abrams SEP 4 is you do not talk about the Abrams SEP 4 bewbies fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:22
|
|
|
The problem the Army has always had with IFVs is that it wants a one-size-fits-all solution to a problem that requires a 30mm gun and TOW launcher at the high end, but 90% of the vehicles should probably be MRAPs or M113s.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:So did we. It eventually shed a bunch of debris all over LEO. Which at least is marginally less-populated than Canada. So instead of testing how it would deal with being slammed into the (cold, huge, deep, diffuse) ocean by slamming something like it into the (cold, huge, deep, diffuse) ocean they decided to slam something like it into the (sandy, upwind of places people actually live, part of legal U.S., subject to airborne dissemination of fallout) Idaho desert? This Idaho desert, the bit at the top with the enormous smear to the immediate right of it? That Idaho desert?  
Schadenboner fucked around with this message at 15:33 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:26
|
|
|
Like an operator of the Bradley or an “operator?” Because you can dismiss everything the second dude says after that sentence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:28
|
|
|
The Namer is a tank hollowed out into an APC. The purpose of it is to drive into Beirut or Gaza and eat missiles all day long without the passengers getting hurt. It doesn't have a turret, and the weight saved from that was thrown into more armor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:28
|
|
|
Bradley (and the modern equivalent the f35) development should probably be seen as inefficient rather than straight failure. At the end of the day, after a couple revisions, you get a pretty decent thing. The problem is that the way it is developed is needlessly (or rather due to considerations beyond the design and it’s parameters - eg politics) inefficient so you end up taking a bunch of extra time and money and get a too-big-to-faul project which in turn leads to expensive fixes and redesigns.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 21:24 |
|
|
If the Bradley was really that garbage you’d have to wonder why we’re still buying them and using the same platform to make M109A7s and 2800 AMPVs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:40
|
|