gli orsi bianchi
Reposted via schöne seele
Saturday, January 7, 2017
lexxerduglas:hopping on that 10 year glow-up trend, from 22 to...
http://ift.tt/1gWStZO
2006
2006
2016
Reposted via Lexxy's Draw Blog
2006
2006
2016
hopping on that 10 year glow-up trend, from 22 to 32
I keep wanting to write some sort of post-mortem for 2016, but I’m having a hard time putting anything into words. It was a complicated year.
Instead, I’ll just say that I’m really happy with the person I’m becoming, happy with the direction my art is going, and happy to have such supportive and kind friends, family, and fans.
I hope this new year brings you joy and strength enough to see it through to the next.
-L
Reposted via Lexxy's Draw Blog
seydouxdaily: Léa Seydoux for ELLE France, 2013 “Cosa mi...
http://ift.tt/1iRSeAO
Reposted via F&O Forgotten Nobility
Léa Seydoux for ELLE France, 2013
“Cosa mi faresti?”
“Se hai tempo mezza giornata ti spiego..”
Reposted via F&O Forgotten Nobility
Thursday, January 5, 2017
Future US Military aircraft development needs to emulate the speed and flexibility of Spacex and Telsa
http://ift.tt/2aB80ot
The US military needs to completely rework the design and development of military aircraft and other military systems. The problems with military aircraft is particularly large because it is often not possible to retrofit advances into military jets. A jet built for stealth or hypersonic speed has to have those capabilities designed from the start.
The F35 is the poster child for bad procurement with many years of delays and cost overruns and design flaws.
Lockheed Martin and Boeing are the main builders of military aircraft for the United States but they also make rocket launch systems. Atlas is manufactured by United Launch Alliance, a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and The Boeing Company, formed in December 2006.
Spacex is vastly smaller company but they produce new rocket engines and new rocket designs at about ten times the speed of Lockheed and Boeing.
Spacex has only been in existence for fifteen years but they have gone through several rocket engines and rocket family designs Design and development was cheaper and faster.
The F35 began design in 1996.
The first F35 production models started in 2006.
They are still not fully certified as militarily operational
The software is still not working properly.
Deliveries of the F-35 for the U.S. military are scheduled until 2037 with a projected service life up to 2070. This plan would mostly freeze the design for 40 years and then keep flying it for another 50+ years.
The Spacex Raptor engine began design in 2009 and had a test firing in 2016. This was done in parallel and overlapped with the Merlin engine work and the Draco engine work.
Tesla is Elon Musk's company for electric cars and new capabilities can be delivered with software patch upgrades that are transmitted overnight.
Spacex is leveraging a lot of 3d printing of parts to enable fewer components and fast and flexible design and development.
Tesla plans to make its factories ten times more productive by reinventing robotic factories every two years.
What really matters to accelerate a sustainable future is being able to scale up production volume as quickly as possible. That is why Tesla engineering has transitioned to focus heavily on designing the machine that makes the machine -- turning the factory itself into a product. A first principles physics analysis of automotive production suggests that somewhere between a 5 to 10 fold improvement is achievable by version 3 on a roughly 2 year iteration cycle. The first Model 3 factory machine should be thought of as version 0.5, with version 1.0 probably in 2018.
The Tesla factories can rapidly incorporate new batteries and model changes.
US Military aircraft engine development is still improving but should have faster development. However, there is an even larger lag of several years between when new more powerful or efficient engines are used on existing aircraft designs.
A US military that was producing new fighter or bomber aircraft design within 6 years and with multiple designs being created in parallel would be able to fly aircraft that was state of the art instead of 20-40 year old designs.
A US military that had working software that kept pace with a fast design and modification cycle would have flexibile and robust systems. Especially if software patches could be delivered within weeks of a problem being noticed and then patched in overnight updates.
China is copying US military technology. However, they are ahead in terms of rapidly fielding many new designs and modified designs. China produced the J20 and the FC31 stealth fighter designs in parallel. They have been more rapidly modifying and improving systems.
Read more »
Reposted via Next Big Future
The US military needs to completely rework the design and development of military aircraft and other military systems. The problems with military aircraft is particularly large because it is often not possible to retrofit advances into military jets. A jet built for stealth or hypersonic speed has to have those capabilities designed from the start.
The F35 is the poster child for bad procurement with many years of delays and cost overruns and design flaws.
Lockheed Martin and Boeing are the main builders of military aircraft for the United States but they also make rocket launch systems. Atlas is manufactured by United Launch Alliance, a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and The Boeing Company, formed in December 2006.
Spacex is vastly smaller company but they produce new rocket engines and new rocket designs at about ten times the speed of Lockheed and Boeing.
Spacex has only been in existence for fifteen years but they have gone through several rocket engines and rocket family designs Design and development was cheaper and faster.
The F35 began design in 1996.
The first F35 production models started in 2006.
They are still not fully certified as militarily operational
The software is still not working properly.
Deliveries of the F-35 for the U.S. military are scheduled until 2037 with a projected service life up to 2070. This plan would mostly freeze the design for 40 years and then keep flying it for another 50+ years.
The Spacex Raptor engine began design in 2009 and had a test firing in 2016. This was done in parallel and overlapped with the Merlin engine work and the Draco engine work.
Tesla is Elon Musk's company for electric cars and new capabilities can be delivered with software patch upgrades that are transmitted overnight.
Spacex is leveraging a lot of 3d printing of parts to enable fewer components and fast and flexible design and development.
Tesla plans to make its factories ten times more productive by reinventing robotic factories every two years.
What really matters to accelerate a sustainable future is being able to scale up production volume as quickly as possible. That is why Tesla engineering has transitioned to focus heavily on designing the machine that makes the machine -- turning the factory itself into a product. A first principles physics analysis of automotive production suggests that somewhere between a 5 to 10 fold improvement is achievable by version 3 on a roughly 2 year iteration cycle. The first Model 3 factory machine should be thought of as version 0.5, with version 1.0 probably in 2018.
The Tesla factories can rapidly incorporate new batteries and model changes.
US Military aircraft engine development is still improving but should have faster development. However, there is an even larger lag of several years between when new more powerful or efficient engines are used on existing aircraft designs.
A US military that was producing new fighter or bomber aircraft design within 6 years and with multiple designs being created in parallel would be able to fly aircraft that was state of the art instead of 20-40 year old designs.
A US military that had working software that kept pace with a fast design and modification cycle would have flexibile and robust systems. Especially if software patches could be delivered within weeks of a problem being noticed and then patched in overnight updates.
China is copying US military technology. However, they are ahead in terms of rapidly fielding many new designs and modified designs. China produced the J20 and the FC31 stealth fighter designs in parallel. They have been more rapidly modifying and improving systems.
Read more »
Reposted via Next Big Future
misterlemonzest: 01-02-17 | Boxer at Rest | Angelo Ferraris on...
http://ift.tt/1iRSeAO
Reposted via F&O Forgotten Nobility
01-02-17 | Boxer at Rest | Angelo Ferraris on 500px.com.
Reposted via F&O Forgotten Nobility
Tuesday, January 3, 2017
brooke eva | chris vongsawatnyc2015{see more on patreon}
EMdrive ground experiments need more rigor or someone can pay for conclusive work in space
http://ift.tt/2aB80ot
George Hathaway provides a detailed analysis of the EMDrive and the recent peer reviewed research paper that measured some thrust and tried to eliminate sources of error. Measurement of Impulsive Thrust from a Closed Radio Frequency Cavity in Vacuum is the paper.
Electrical engineer George Hathaway runs Hathaway Consulting Services, which has worked with inventors and investors since 1979 via an experimental physics laboratory near Toronto, Canada. Hathaway’s concentration is on novel propulsion and energy technologies.
White, March and the other NASA funded researchers made considerable effort to reduce the possibility of measurement artifact. However it appears that there are some fundamental problems with the interpretation of the measurement data produced by their thrust balance. This document will analyse the measurement procedure and comment on the interpretation.
In addition to mechanical and related considerations, the authors’ methods of analysis of sensor data to derive thrusts rests on untenable grounds. Not only is there an assumption of the presence of only a “true” impulse signal as well as a thermal signal, there is an assumption that the observed signal can be broken down into just these 2 components and amplitudes can be calculated based on an idealized superposition assumption. Therefore, until more control tests are performed allowing a more accurate method for estimation of thrusts, no faith can be placed in the thrust magnitudes reported in the paper.
Hathaway calls for continued testing of EmDrive concepts and increased rigor in experimental procedures.
China is testing an EMDrive on its space station
The Cannae drive is also propellentless like the EMdrive but is a different design. They will test their system orbit in a cubesat in 2017 Cannae is not using an EmDrive thruster in their upcoming launch. Cannae is using it’s own proprietary thruster technology which requires no on-board propellant to generate thrust. In addition, this project is being done as a private venture. Cannae is only working with a private commercial partners on the upcoming mission.
It costs about $27000 a pound to send cargo to the international space station. Launching an experiment into low earth orbit (and not sending it to the space station) would be cheaper.
A 100 pound EMDrive experiment at the space station would cost about $2.7 million to transport.
Read more » 
Reposted via Next Big Future
George Hathaway provides a detailed analysis of the EMDrive and the recent peer reviewed research paper that measured some thrust and tried to eliminate sources of error. Measurement of Impulsive Thrust from a Closed Radio Frequency Cavity in Vacuum is the paper.
Electrical engineer George Hathaway runs Hathaway Consulting Services, which has worked with inventors and investors since 1979 via an experimental physics laboratory near Toronto, Canada. Hathaway’s concentration is on novel propulsion and energy technologies.
White, March and the other NASA funded researchers made considerable effort to reduce the possibility of measurement artifact. However it appears that there are some fundamental problems with the interpretation of the measurement data produced by their thrust balance. This document will analyse the measurement procedure and comment on the interpretation.
In addition to mechanical and related considerations, the authors’ methods of analysis of sensor data to derive thrusts rests on untenable grounds. Not only is there an assumption of the presence of only a “true” impulse signal as well as a thermal signal, there is an assumption that the observed signal can be broken down into just these 2 components and amplitudes can be calculated based on an idealized superposition assumption. Therefore, until more control tests are performed allowing a more accurate method for estimation of thrusts, no faith can be placed in the thrust magnitudes reported in the paper.
Hathaway calls for continued testing of EmDrive concepts and increased rigor in experimental procedures.
China is testing an EMDrive on its space station
The Cannae drive is also propellentless like the EMdrive but is a different design. They will test their system orbit in a cubesat in 2017 Cannae is not using an EmDrive thruster in their upcoming launch. Cannae is using it’s own proprietary thruster technology which requires no on-board propellant to generate thrust. In addition, this project is being done as a private venture. Cannae is only working with a private commercial partners on the upcoming mission.
It costs about $27000 a pound to send cargo to the international space station. Launching an experiment into low earth orbit (and not sending it to the space station) would be cheaper.
A 100 pound EMDrive experiment at the space station would cost about $2.7 million to transport.
Read more »
Reposted via Next Big Future
Monday, January 2, 2017
Friday, December 30, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)