ShowNews

Oshkosh Takes a Shot on Space

Discuss this Gallery 9

on Jul 24, 2017

I'm personally more interested in flying cars than going to Mars. I wish there was more coverage of what is going on in new flying machine technologies other than planes and spacecraft. I prefer my pie in the sky to my place in space. We need a genuine solution to crowded and crumbling highways and flying "cars" to commute in is a very feasible solution coming very soon. Sooner than flying to Mars.

on Jul 24, 2017

And you want them to be able to fly cars? I'm completely against automated driving but I'd rather see that then some nitwit who is driving / flying a car. Just because they can afford it doesn't mean they should have it.

on Jul 24, 2017

Anything flying above 3000 AGL is going to have to be controlled and we'll need a very sophisticated computer system to do that.
It will have to integrate seamlessly with the flight plan and the vehicle for safety.
Below 3000 feet - you've just moved I-75 into the air.
Imagine THAT jam.

on Jul 24, 2017

I can't imagine the noise from thousands of flying cars buzzing around any major city. Drone's look all wonderful when you study the footage, but up close, they're bloody annoying. If you think the NIMBY crowd is bad with downtown airports, wait until they get flying cars coming in for landings anywhere near them. While I can see the appeal on longer distance trips, I actually think something like Elon Musk's Tunnel boring and hyper loop technologies will have more of an impact on transit (as well as short commuter flights) than flying cars ever could.

In terms of space, I think we'll find new justifications for doing it that we hadn't even dreamed of much like Columbus did when he (re-) discovered the Americas. It isn't an either/or.

on Jul 24, 2017

Call me when an F-1 shows up. The RS-25 is the ugly stepchild engine nobody really wants.

on Jul 24, 2017

The F-1 was a huge brute which thanks to some very persistent experimentation was able to generate 1.5 million pounds thrust in a single chamber; a great engineering feat, but it was pretty low in terms of efficiency (gas generator cycle, RP1/LOX). The RS-25 is a fuel-rich closed cycle cryogenic engine of great efficiency, the only closed cycle US rocket engine to have flown to date. Very complex and expensive, of course, but proven and reusable. In the RP1/LOX game, the more modern closed-cycle four-chambered RD-170/RD-171M is more powerful and has almost 20% higher specific impulse at sea level than the F-1, with about the same thrust/weight ratio. The RD-180 of the Atlas V is basically half an RD-170. In terms of utility, of course, Space X's Merlin 1D has everybody beaten because it is throttleable and restartable, very light and totally reusable, despite its gas generator conservatism. In this constellation the F-1 doesn't really fit, for all its awesome fireworks.

on Jul 24, 2017

Got that one in one!

on Jul 24, 2017

In regards to the BO slide - "successfully demonstrating the reuse of a rocket for the first time" - there are just so many things wrong with that statement I'm not sure where to begin. But the main thing to keep in mind is that the word rocket in that sentence should be qualified with the term "sub-orbital".

on Jul 25, 2017

I dont really know much about hacking after so many tries i met Cyberhacking lord who later help me find out my husband has been cheating on me and stealing from my bank account, he had this scheme going for 6 months. He gave me access to his mail,social media account,phone(could see deleted messages) and even track his location, still going to sue to him. Having doubts in your relationship? contact him (cyberhackinglord@gmail.com)

Please log in or register to post comments.