Flight - Gizmodo

posts about #flight more →
One Spectacular Big Bang
Southwest and Alaska Airlines to Test Ad-Supported Wi-Fi
HTC Tilt 2 and HTC Pure WinMo 6.5 Phones Arrive on AT&T
Crazy Teenager Takes Off In Homemade Pedal-Powered Aircraft
Giant Wraparound Screen Shows Air Traffic in Real-Time
Blue Angels Cockpit Cam Viewing Experience Should Include Barf Bag
USAF Thunderbirds Are GO!
A Look at the Mysterious 'Black Box'
Water-Powered JetLev Jetpack Would Be the Most Godly Firefighting Tool Ever
Insane UI: High Res Space Shuttle Cockpit Control Photo

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

psychonaut2021:Secrets of the Pineal Gland
10/29/09

In reply to One Spectacular Big Bang
The white "cloud" you see around isn't the sonic boom. The vapor cone has nothing to do with breaking the sound barrier, just a drop in air pressure at the nose of the rocket.

However, just like Carl Sagan said at the end of one of his books; "But I could be wrong." #aresix
Reply

CD
10/30/09

@psychonaut2021: Secrets of the Pineal Gland: Thank you! Finally someone who knows what they're talking about. #aresix
Reply

psychonaut2021:Secrets of the Pineal Gland promoted this comment CD was starred CD was unstarred

John Hendow
10/29/09

In reply to One Spectacular Big Bang
"Be amazed at the sheer beauty of the mighty rocket as it breaks the sound barrier... "
It is amazing, but not necessarily an indication of breaking the sound barrier. The shock cone in this picture is actually a Prandtl-Glauert singularity which can occur below the threshold of sound. The rocket is going fast enough, with enough moisture in the air around it, to cause a compression-rarefaction-recovery... curve. The negative pressure shock during recovery results in condensation. This phenomenon is not limited to transonic jets and rockets. Even a bullwhip can cause a P-G singularity. Mmmm paste... #aresix
Reply

ripfire promoted this comment John Hendow was starred John Hendow was unstarred

ripfire
10/29/09

@John Hendow: The rocket went Mach 4. I believe that's enough to break the sound barrier regardless of what the picture indicated. #aresix
Reply

ripfire was starred ripfire was unstarred

Jacob Gold
10/29/09

@ripfire: The rocket reached a top speed of 4.7M. This was slightly before MAX-Q (maximum dynamic pressure) and so does show the pressure wave build up from approaching the speed of sound, however it started dissipating before it reached it. #aresix
Reply

ripfire promoted this comment Jacob Gold was starred Jacob Gold was unstarred

ripfire
10/29/09

@Jacob Gold: So Jesus was right then. #aresix
Reply

ripfire was starred ripfire was unstarred

bobdobbs
10/29/09

In reply to One Spectacular Big Bang
Breads and circuses.
Reply

Edited by bobdobbs at 10/29/09 11:03 AM bobdobbs was starred bobdobbs was unstarred

Brett Benedict
10/29/09

In reply to One Spectacular Big Bang
Quick! Minds of Giz! Explain to me why the breaking of the sound barrier is visible in 10 words or less. Go! #aresix
Reply

Brett Benedict was starred Brett Benedict was unstarred

psychiccheese
10/29/09

@Brett Benedict:
pressure waves build up and compress air particles. condensation. #aresix
Reply

psychiccheese was starred psychiccheese was unstarred

fatbencher
10/29/09

@psychiccheese: nearly a subliminal haiku win!

'pressure waves build up
and compress air particles
hence condensation' #aresix
Reply

jakebathman promoted this comment fatbencher was starred fatbencher was unstarred

Hello Mister Walrus
10/29/09

In reply to One Spectacular Big Bang
So what's the difference between this rocket and the ones that they used in the 1970s or so? I'm sure there have been improvements, but it's hard for us civilians to appreciate or understand the technical details. #aresix
Reply

Hickeroar
10/29/09

@Hello Mister Walrus:

This is based off of space shuttle tech if I remember right. The first stage boost is supposedly built from the current shuttle's fuel tank.

I would like to know if this thing can make it to the moon as-is, or if they'll need additionaly boosters on top of that. #aresix
Reply

Hickeroar was starred Hickeroar was unstarred

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis
10/29/09

@Hello Mister Walrus: It's like the New Beetle vs the original Beetle. Only, not based on ICBM design. #aresix
Reply

Julien321
10/29/09

@Hello Mister Walrus:
It uses solid repellent and not conventional liquid fuel. Advantages are not likely to explode and can reuse the shell. Disadvantage you can't throttle up or down and once ignited you cant "shut" it off. #aresix
Reply

ripfire promoted this comment Julien321 was starred Julien321 was unstarred

ripfire
10/29/09

@Julien321: "It uses solid repellent and not conventional liquid fuel. Advantages are not likely to explode.."

Tell me you are kidding.. Right?

[en.wikipedia.org] #aresix
Reply

ripfire was starred ripfire was unstarred

Julien321
10/29/09

@ripfire:
Solid fuel only burns on the outside surface and as the surface layers burn off the lower layers start to burn and become the surface. So it IS much less likely to suffer a catastrophic explosion then volatile liquid propellants. #aresix
Reply

Julien321 was starred Julien321 was unstarred

mwhite66
10/29/09

In reply to One Spectacular Big Bang
So we shot a nose cone into the Atlantic. Stuff Alan Shepard in there, and it's 1961 all over again. Where's the 50 years of progress? #aresix
Reply

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis promoted this comment mwhite66 was starred mwhite66 was unstarred

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis
10/29/09

@mwhite66: We lost the technology. We lost the tooling. We lost the pioneering spirit that drove people to literally shoot for the moon.

The Shuttle was supposed to be a superior technology, and in some ways it really was, but from a versatility and cost standpoint it was a loss.

Over 50 years people retire, people die, blueprints get lost, tribal knowledge disappears, and you literally have to re-invent the rocket to get back to where you were back then. Only, updated with all the latest/greatest innovative hardware. #aresix
Reply

Ridley
10/29/09

@Lite: hates Illinois Nazis: Are you a big fan of Space Cowboys by chance? #aresix
Reply

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis promoted this comment Ridley was starred Ridley was unstarred

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis
10/29/09

@Ridley: It was an amusing, if sad movie. But no, I'm not a fan of the movie. #aresix
Reply

PurpleMonkeyDishwasher:
10/29/09

In reply to One Spectacular Big Bang
"OK, so it looks like a flying condom"

So a review from Frucci is pending?

Note: Yes, I know this is probably getting old but that review is permanently scarring my brain and with terms like "One Spectacular Big Bang", "sheer beauty of the mighty rocket ", "six minute flight was a success", and "the vehicle flew better than expected", I couldn't help myself.
Reply

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis promoted this comment Edited by PurpleMonkeyDishwasher: at 10/29/09 10:12 AM

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis
10/29/09

In reply to One Spectacular Big Bang
I'm just glad the damn thing didn't "hop" and asplode as it struck the gantry. #aresix
Reply

asten77
10/29/09

@Lite: hates Illinois Nazis: it had a pretty good lean to it right off the pad. As someone who knows jack about what it was supposed to be doing, I was worried. #aresix
Reply

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis promoted this comment asten77 was starred asten77 was unstarred

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis
10/29/09

@asten77: Well, several months back (or was it last year?) they were worried that it might "hop" on ignition. #aresix
Reply

Michael Wiegand
10/08/09

In reply to Southwest and Alaska Airlines to Test Ad-Supported Wi-Fi
Cut Alaska and Southwest some slack, guys. Their respective boardrooms only just discovered that the internet exists and that people might want to use it on a plane.
Reply

Kaiser-Machead promoted this comment Michael Wiegand was starred Michael Wiegand was unstarred

Kaiser-Machead
10/08/09

@Michael Wiegand: The saddest part is the photo above is not retouched.
Reply

Kaiser-Machead was starred Kaiser-Machead was unstarred

Rick Lobrecht
10/08/09

In reply to Southwest and Alaska Airlines to Test Ad-Supported Wi-Fi
how would this work? An ad injecting proxy server at the access point?
Reply

Rick Lobrecht was starred Rick Lobrecht was unstarred

jamjen
10/08/09

@Rick Lobrecht: Not too sure, but I remember back in the day of NetZero actually being free, they'd have a banner ad that was "always on top" that was it's own window (not the browser). So you could force users to download a small executable to use the WiFi (not to connect, but to actually reach out to the internet). You have to launch the file, which would then take up ad space on your desktop.

I have no idea if this is even close to what they'd try (I'd actually bet not), but it's plausible.
Reply

jakebathman promoted this comment jamjen was starred jamjen was unstarred

jakebathman
10/08/09

@jamjen: I can't remember what airport I was at, but they had an ad-supported wifi service where you had to watch an ad in your browser to get 15 minutes of connectivity. Getting on the network was open, just the browsing part was restricted until you watched the ad (or paid a little $ to get ad-free internet).
Reply

jakebathman was starred jakebathman was unstarred

GitEmSteveDave_OverSleptThisMorn
10/08/09

In reply to Southwest and Alaska Airlines to Test Ad-Supported Wi-Fi
I wonder: Could one person make their PC a hotspot, and everyone leech off them?
[lifehacker.com]
Reply

psychiccheese
10/08/09

@GitEmSteveDave_IsWaving: Pay for the connection, sell to passengers at 2$/person.

I like the way you think.
Reply

GitEmSteveDave_IsGWaving promoted this comment psychiccheese was starred psychiccheese was unstarred

Kaiser-Machead
10/08/09

In reply to Southwest and Alaska Airlines to Test Ad-Supported Wi-Fi
I'd still like to pay to avoid ads. I'd get enough ads on the pages I visit (unless Adblock stops em dead), so I don't want ads popping up every now and then from the actual WiFi service itself. It may sting for some, but in my case, after paying $300+ for a flight to wherever, $30+ for the cab ride to the airport and other varied costs for drinks and food I get at either the terminal, mid-flight or both, what's another $10+ for access for a couple of hours.
Reply

Edited by Kaiser-Machead at 10/08/09 12:59 PM Kaiser-Machead was starred Kaiser-Machead was unstarred

jakebathman
10/08/09

In reply to Southwest and Alaska Airlines to Test Ad-Supported Wi-Fi
I have absolutely no problems with anything ad-supported. I don't expect anything for free, and it's a good compromise on a paying service.

Who knows, I might actually buy something from SkyMall instead of thinking about it on the plane then forgetting all about it once I leave.
Reply

jakebathman was starred jakebathman was unstarred

scoobydoo
10/08/09

In reply to Southwest and Alaska Airlines to Test Ad-Supported Wi-Fi
Looks like the source article screwed up - JiWire already exists, they are just one of the companies behind the new service.
Reply

scoobydoo was starred scoobydoo was unstarred

not_a_virus.exe.vbs
10/05/09

In reply to HTC Tilt 2 and HTC Pure WinMo 6.5 Phones Arrive on AT&T
What is the HTC Pure's generic name? I want to buy it unlocked.
Reply

Earlier threads | All threads | Show hidden threads | Show featured threads only | Start a new discussion

Gizmodo Team

SUBSCRIBE TO Gizmodo

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment