Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:140000 Newton (Score 2, Informative) 153

Saturn V was a 'multi-gear' rocket. To lift off the pad, all 5 main rockets fired. As altitude increased, the center rocket turned off to minimize stress on the rocket (stay subsonic???)

Space shuttle also has multiple speeds. If you remember the Challenger disaster - the last message from ground was "Go with throttle up" Apparently the shuttle was high enough to go full throttle (again) and not worry about aerodynamic stresses.

Most liquid fueled rockets are throttleable. Both the space shuttle and Saturn V's throttle down to avoid putting "too much stress" on the airframe. What this really means, is that they didn't want to put more weight into airframe structure, and instead reduce throttle to the point where the atmosphere thins enough that one can throttle up without surpassing the design strength of the airframe. By the way, this point is called Max-Q and for the space shuttle, it is at 11km in altitude. For the space shuttle main engines, this means they throttle up to 104% of specification power (due to improvements over the years, the SSME maximum safe throttle is actually 109% of specification).

One of the issues with the shuttles solid rocket boosters - they are steerable - allowing insertion into a very precise orbit.

Compare that with the typical home built - solid rocket, that basically goes were you point it...usually...give or take a bit.

The problem with solid rocket motors for space travel is two fold. The first is that they cannot be throttled or turned off. The second is that they are considerably less efficient pound-for-pound than liquid fueled rockets. The typical measure of rocket efficiency is specific impulse, which is measured in seconds. For example, the solid rocket boosters of the shuttle have a specific impulse of 242 seconds, while the space shuttle main engines produce a specific impulse of 363.

Programming

Submission + - No iPhone SDK Means No iPhone Killer Apps (gizmodo.com)

iPhoneLover/Hater writes: Gizmodo is running an article analyzing the potential failure of the iPhone as a truly revolutionary platform. The reason: no SDK to harness the true power of Mac OS X and the frameworks contained in Apple's smart cell. From the article: "According to Apple, "no software developer kit is required for the iPhone." However, the truth is that the lack of an SDK means that there won't be a killer application for the iPhone. It also means the iPhone's potential as an amazing computing and communication platform will never be realized. And because of this and no matter how Apple tries to sell it, the iPhone won't make a revolution happen."
Bug

Apple Safari On Windows Broken On First Day 595

An anonymous reader writes "David Maynor, infamous for the Apple Wi-Fi hack, has discovered bugs in the Windows version of Safari mere hours after it was released. He notes in the blog that his company does not report vulnerabilities to Apple. His claimed catch for 'an afternoon of idle futzing': 4 DoS bugs and 2 remote execution vulnerabilities." Separately, within 2 hours Thor Larholm found a URL protocol handler command injection vulnerability that allows remote command execution.

Feed How Lead Exposure Produces Learning Deficits (sciencedaily.com)

Exposure to levels of lead that are similar to those measured in lead-intoxicated children reduces the birth and survival of new neurons (neurogenesis) in the brain. A study of young adult rats provides evidence that explains exactly how exposure to lead during brain development produces learning deficits.
Programming

Submission + - Static code analysis tools?

rewt66 writes: We are looking for a good static analysis tool for a fairly large (half a million lines) C/C++ project. What tools do you recommend? What do you recommend avoiding? What experience (good or bad) have you had with such tools?
Data Storage

Submission + - Open Source Highly Available Storage Solutions?

Gunfighter writes: I run a small datacenter for one of my customers, but they're constantly filling up different hard drives on different servers and then shuffling the data back and forth. At their current level of business, they can't afford to invest in a Storage Area Network of any sort, so they want to spread the load of their data storage needs across their existing servers like Google does. The only software packages I've found that do this seamlessly are Lustre and NFS. The problem with Lustre is that it has a single metadata server unless you configure failover, and NFS isn't redundant at all and can be a nightmare to manage. The only thing I've found that even comes close is Starfish. While it looks promising, I'm wondering if anyone else has found a reliable solution that is as easy to set up and manage? Eventually, they would like to be able to scale from their current storage usage levels (~2TB) to several hundred terabytes once the operation goes into full production.

Slashdot Top Deals

"It is easier to fight for principles than to live up to them." -- Alfred Adler

Working...