Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work
-
-
Why have none of the US /UK/Japanese airlines ordered the Irkut MC-21 yet?
A new airliner was launched on June 8, 2016 by the Russian company Irkut Corporation. Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/ The airliner looks good on paper: Empty plane weight is reduced due to
Point I like:
- The only maintenance facilities for this plane are in Eastern Europe, meaning that if a US airline bought some, they'd have to either pay for a brand new maintenance facility, or take the thing out-of-service long enough to fly it to Europe every time it needed maintenance. And considering the range of the plane, the Europe trip would be quite long and involved.
If you're wondering how much a maintenance facility costs, think about how American Airlines is still flying tons of crappy Super-80s specifically because they sunk a ton of money into standardizing on that model before it became apparent what a horrible investment it was. Now they're pretty much the only ones who can maintain the things. Compare to Alaska, who run a fleet that's entirely extremely-popular 737s, which means they can maintain them at virtually any airport on Earth, even if they didn't want to ever build their own facility. (Which they have, but you get the point.)
A point I didn't see mentioned:
- If you're a western European, Japanese, or American airline the wisest move here is to simply wait for Airbus or Boeing to replicate the "advantages" of this airframe. (Scare-quotes because, as another answer pointed out, a wider aisle is moot in the US, since it's not wider enough per FAA rules to add more seats, it just means you're hauling around extra fuselage. It's a very very marginal improvement to passenger comfort, which is worth a net of probably $0.) (Interesting side-note: 737s are slightly narrower than A-320s because 737 fuselages travel by rail to the final assembly plant. The width is dictated by the railroad loading gauge in the US.)
And of course the real answer:
- It doesn't have an FAA flightworthy certification yet! I'm sure it'll easily qualify for one, but without one, or a firm promise that the design'll be iterated until it has one, it's a complete non-starter for US airlines and probably also Japanese airlines.
Seriously, though, it looks like a fine machine to me, and I'd have absolutely zero qualms about flying in a Russian-made airliner, given the opportunity.
-
What is the best way to answer somthing complicated? Use analogy from something even more complicated:
C++11 introduced a standardized memory model. What does it mean? And how is it going to affect C++ programming?
C++11 introduced a standardized memory model, but what exactly does that mean? And how is it going to affect C++ programming? This article (by Gavin Clarke who quotes Herb Sutter) says that, The m...
Edit: I estimate that there are at least 159 snobby dickheads on SO
-
@dse said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
I estimate that there are at least 159 snobby dickheads on SO
That's funny: I don't remember voting that up, though SO clearly thinks I did so.
-
@blakeyrat said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
@Lorne-Kates No. No it was not.
Right, it was Little Red Riding Hood I was thinking of.
-
@dkf said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
@dse said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
I estimate that there are at least 159 snobby dickheads on SO
That's funny: I don't remember voting that up, though SO clearly thinks I did so.
To tell the truth I was so close to vote that up! But I remembered the @blakeyrat's thread and his plight in dealing with dickheads, and decided to be a little better today
-
How did the Enterprise lower the Reliant's shields in Wrath of Khan?
In Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, there is a scene in which the Enterprise finds itself Right at the most critical moment of the battle however, What exactly did Kirk transmit, and how did it
THEY EXPLICITLY SAY IN THE MOVIE HOW THEY DO THIS!
Another "I like this movie enough to ask questions about it, but not apparently enough to actually watch the film" question.
-
@blakeyrat said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
THEY EXPLICITLY SAY IN THE MOVIE HOW THEY DO THIS!
"It was an inside job, they planted the virus in there long ago!"
:D
-
Would a 100% simulated war be a way to solve national conflict?
My world is similar to our daily world except that fully immersive virtual reality is already well-developed. The virtual reality is built by scanning real environment. The system was first used to...
This guy uses a heck of a lot of words when he could have just said, "you know, like in that one episode of Star Trek."
If your "worldbuilding" involves ripping off ideas that were on 50-year-old Star Trek episodes, maybe go for some more originality next time.
EDIT: actually now that I read his question in more detail, it sounds closer to Robot Jox. Which is an AWESOME movie I must now find on streaming.
(In Robot Jox the various nations settle their dispute via giant robot duels.)
-
Does Aragorn wear pants?
Back when I was reading LOTR in Russian, I remember fans arguing over the issue of whether Aragorn wore pants (or rather, using the British term, trousers), or not - what I later learned was a major
The best thing about this question isn't the question itself (which is pretty great) but the underlying assumption, which is that if a book doesn't specifically mention a character wearing pants, they must not ever wear pants!
Maaaaaaaan. If I ever write a novel, I hope I remember to explicitly mention the pants of every single character to make sure that Russian readers don't misunderstand me. – Kyle Strand 21 hours ago
I am not alone in thinking that.
-
@blakeyrat I remember this movie. I think the losing side would just start a real war after failing the robot duel.
-
@blakeyrat said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
ANOTHER MASON WHEELER SIGHTING!
Where was the first one?
-
@masonwheeler I no longer remember. Scroll up until you find it.
-
@blakeyrat That's the first mention in the thread, according to my browser's Search function. That's why I asked. (And yes, I do know about infinite scroll on here.)
-
@masonwheeler Then you will forever wonder.
-
@blakeyrat Don't forget to mention the part where people go "Why didn't the captain change the codes as soon as he gets the ship to prevent someone from taking over, surely someone tech-savvy would be smart enough to do that!" And people making stupid hacking references.
-
@blakeyrat For the record, the reason I posted the comment that so mystified you as a comment rather than an answer is because it mostly existed for the purpose of snarking rather than providing a constructive answer, and mods tend to frown upon such things as actual answers.
-
How is it possible that 7 of 9's 24th century ocular implant is better at detecting disruptions in space-time than a 29th century Federation timeship?
Star Trek Voyager "Relativity": BRAXTON: For some reason, I always think you'll remember. I'm Captain Braxton. This is Lieutenant Ducane. You're aboard the Federation Timeship Relativity.
The flaw here is a limited definition of "better". Seven's implant is probably "better" because it's attached to a person who can move around the target location without being suspicious (for the most part). Not necessarily because it's more "powerful" or has a "longer range" or whatever definition this asker is using for the word "better".
Sure, future cops in that episode might have a time-hole detecting tri-corder, but if they use it they're a couple weird guys unaccountably trespassing on someone else's ship! That's not "better" for the purpose of accomplishing their mission. Seven actually belongs there (in most of the time periods they need to visit.)
#Star Trek Geek
-
@masonwheeler said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
because it mostly existed for the purpose of snarking
You could have removed the last few words and posted it as an answer, then gotten all your internetpointzzz.
Then once you got your precious internetpointzzz you could just make the same snark in the comments of your answer, why not.
-
@blakeyrat said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
You could have removed the last few words and posted it as an answer, then gotten all your internetpointzzz.
Then once you got your precious internetpointzzz you could just make the same snark in the comments of your answer, why not.
You're assuming I only do it for the "precious internetpointzzz". Sometimes I post stuff just for fun; this was one such time.
-
Is Sisko referring to the events of First Contact here and if so how does it affect things?
DS9 "In Purgatory's Shadow (Part 1)": SISKO: A Dominion invasion of the Alpha Quadrant will affect Cardassia every bit as much as it's going to affect us. Besides, we need all the help we ca...
-
This is the risk of binge-watching a show years after it aired, especially the Next Gen Star Trek series which all overlap not only with each other, but also with the first couple Next Gen movies. It'd be very difficult to watch them in actual order. (For Star Trek, I had the benefit of at least having seen many of them when they first aired-- when I binged Stargate: SG-1 I had absolutely NO idea what spinoffs/movies to watch and when to start watching them, although it was obvious the last few years of SG-1 overlapped with at least one or two of them.)
-
Did this guy watch First Contact? The Federation lost like 20 ships or more. So yes, of course Sisko's talking about First Contact when he said the "record Borg attack" has spread the fleet thin. What the hell other "recent Borg attack" would he be referring to?
So yet another case of "I like a show enough that I'll ask detailed questions about it, but not enough that I'll actually watch it". (Although in this case, he's refusing to watch a movie with the same world, timeline, and characters, but same thing really.)
The funny thing is the Next Gen series actually interact with each other LESS than the writers originally intended them to. Ensign Ro was supposed to get posted to Deep Space 9, but the actress didn't want to sign up for a multi-year contract, so they invented Kira instead. Then when they were planning Voyager, Ensign Ro was supposed to be the Maquis who takes over the engine room-- her last appearance in Next Gen sets this plot point up. Once again the actress didn't want to sign a long contract so they invented Torres. Also, Paris in Voyager was supposed to be Wesley Crusher's flight team leader from that one Next Gen episode, but while they signed the same actor they decided to invent a "new character" so they didn't have to pay the writers of the Next Gen script residuals for every single Voyager episode. "New character" being in scare-quotes because it's really just a new name, and they edited-out any dialog explaining why he started the series in prison. So the absolutely laziest way possible of creating a new character.
-
-
@blakeyrat I searched for "mason" in all pages of this thread, and that was the first mention of @masonwheeler . Maybe you saw him in stackoverflow but didn't comment about this here.
-
@fbmac More likely it's in the status thread where I used to post this stuff before people start nagging me to make a topic for it.
-
How do people exit an airlock from the Defiant to DS9?
Okay, so this has been something that has bothered me for a long time. Whenever anyone enters or leaves the Defiant, they do so through an airlock. Yet, when you look at how the Defiant docks, it d...
Ah, another question about the vaguest ship in Starfleet: the Defiant. How big is it? Depends on what shot you're looking at. Depends on whether it's the CGI model or plastic model (which, BTW, look barely anything alike.) Is it the actual Defiant, or the Sao Paulo renamed into the Defiant? They should have different registration numbers, but the DS9 SFX guys forgot that a lot. Shuttle bays? Cargo bays? Who knows.
The answer to "how does it dock with DS9?" is basically, wave your arms wildly for a few seconds.
-
This post is deleted!
-
How many ships can dock at DS9 at the same time?
How many ships can be docked at Deep Space 9 at the same time? Does the number of ships depend on their size?
This guy seems to think 3 Galaxy class ships could fit on those upper pylons. I doubt it. Not with enough safety margin at least.
The real answer is the station was built by Cardassians, whose largest ships (at least largest we see) are Galor class, which are significantly smaller (or at least a lot more compact) than the Federation's Galaxy class.
The Federation space stations we see in Star Trek all seem to contain large internal space for their ships, instead of docking them externally. Which is kind of stupid, but hey. Consistent design at least. It's also worth noting that most "Deep Space" locations weren't space stations, but actually bases on planets, where there's no facilities for repairing starships at all.
To the guy who comments that the docking arms look fragile:
- There's no gravity in space, so they don't have to be very strong, and
- It's well-established that Cardassians build the station with ridiculously sturdy materials for whatever reason. Characters complain about this at several instances, usually when cutting through a wall or forcing an airlock door open would have helped them out in some way.
-
@blakeyrat I don't see why three Galaxy class or larger vessels couldn't dock there. Looking at the perspective of that picture with the Galaxy ship docked it looks like there's plenty of room for a few other ships. With regards to safety margins, I don't think that they are really much of a concern as the spacedock near earth has very narrow sides for a ship to get out of. (Granted we never see a Galaxy class inside spacedock so maybe they've upgraded it over the years?)
-
@theBread Well the saving grace is I don't think you'd ever get more than 2 Galaxy class ships there at once in the first place. Then you can just dock one in the upper pylons and the other in the lower pylons and everybody'd be happy.
@theBread said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
(Granted we never see a Galaxy class inside spacedock so maybe they've upgraded it over the years?)
There's an episode of Next Gen that shows the Enterprise-D inside one of those mushroom-shaped Federation space docks. The episode where the Binars steal the ship to use its computer as a backup for their own.
I hope you appreciate the Googling it took to finally find a screencap of it:
Those mushroom-shaped space stations are hugenormous.
-
@blakeyrat That's some impressive Goolging (or was it binge binging?). After looking at that image a little longer, the ships that would probably cause the most trouble would be the Nebula class (The Galaxy saucer only) and a Romulan D'deridex warbird.
I can also think of a few situations where they'd have multiple Galaxy class ships near DS-9, but you never see them docked.
And yes, those stations are flipping huge. People may hate the reboot universe, but I kind of like that version of the spacedock more than the giant mushroom.
-
@theBread If you want a brain puzzler, think about this: in the pilot of DS9, they state the Enterprise-D delivers all three of the Runabouts they use throughout the DS9 series. (Well, they get a bunch of replacements too.)
Where did the Enterprise store them? Runabouts are like 10 times the size of the shuttles we see in Next Gen.
-
@blakeyrat The same place they kept the Argo. Also, the Enterprise-D had huge cargo holds (large enough to keep several groups of Irish people!), and could probably hold these things easily.
-
@blakeyrat You could post all of this to that answer, and earn some Internet pointz!!
-
@theBread said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
The same place they kept the Argo.
The Argo fits inside a shuttle that seemed to be specifically designed to drop-off the Argo and do nothing else.
As the Red Letter Review says, they have this shuttle which can hover, use scanners, has transporters, go mach whatever, etc. And the only thing they use it for is to deliver a FAR LESS CAPABLE vehicle.
-
@blakeyrat they don't have to be inside the Enterprise, just its warp field.
-
@Boner said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
@blakeyrat they don't have to be inside the Enterprise, just its warp field.
they would have to keep up with enterprise impulse engines to stay on the warp bubble, if that's so
-
@blakeyrat said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
he answer to "how does it dock with DS9?" is basically, wave your arms wildly for a few seconds.
They dock the same way anyone else docks. Ask Ivonova for permission.
-
@blakeyrat said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
There's no gravity in space, so they don't have to be very strong, and
Datshit?
There's no gravity, but there's still mass and inertia. If those pylons were fragile, you'd barely have any margin of error when docking anything. The slightest bump or miscalc and SNAP.
Answer #2 is more likely.
Also, why does anything dock when they have transporters?
Also, why does anyone give vaginal birth when they have transporters?
-
@Lorne-Kates would you use a tele transporter knowing it creates a copy of you and kill the original?
if it fails killing the original, who owns your stuff and your job and etc?
-
@fbmac said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
@Lorne-Kates would you use a tele transporter knowing it creates a copy of you and kill the original?
Sure. It's like getting a free pardon for all my trans-hooker murders.
if it fails killing the original, who owns your stuff and your job and etc?
Whoever says "Fuck you" loudest.
-
@blakeyrat The reasoning for having the Argo was that it blended in somehow with the mad-max civilization that existed on the planet in Nemesis. It probably existed for those moments when the planet's gravity field is having distortions that are blocking the dilithium pulse of the impulse drives. Which means unless you have a tetrion emitter in your body cavity somewhere, you're stuck using an ICE vehicle and no flying.
-
@theBread said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
The reasoning for having the Argo was that it blended in somehow with the mad-max civilization that existed on the planet in Nemesis.
Much like the Red Letter Media review, I was really confused over whether those Mad Max guys were supposed to be the bad guy minions working for Shinzon or just random aliens who just randomly happened to live there. (If the latter, uh... Prime Directive?)
@theBread said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
It probably existed for those moments when the planet's gravity field is having distortions that are blocking the dilithium pulse of the impulse drives. Which means unless you have a tetrion emitter in your body cavity somewhere, you're stuck using an ICE vehicle and no flying.
Right. Which is a great technobabble explanation which unfortunately doesn't explain why they used a shuttle to drop-off the Argo. (They could have beamed it down, that would have been kind of interesting.)
-
@blakeyrat said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
Prime Directive
prime directive == bad plot device
-
@blakeyrat The way the movie described it, those guys shooting at them weren't minions of shinzon (we didn't know about him yet), but just citizens of that planet defending their territory from some strange thingies in a stupid truck.
Honestly, someone at the studio was like "WHAT IF THE ENTERPRISE HAD A SWEET DUNE BUGGY". Everyone didn't want to argue with that person because they're the head of finance, so they compromised and took the shuttle and the argo at the same time.
-
@theBread said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
The way the movie described it, those guys shooting at them weren't minions of shinzon (we didn't know about him yet), but just citizens of that planet defending their territory from some strange thingies in a stupid truck.
Right but then the Federation just invaded the shit out of these guys' planet, right? That doesn't sound like a very Captain Picard thing to do, at least without even commenting on it.
@theBread said in Blakeyrat Reads StackOverflow While Bored At Work:
Honestly, someone at the studio was like "WHAT IF THE ENTERPRISE HAD A SWEET DUNE BUGGY".
Apparently it was Patrick Stewart's idea. Also the movie was written by Brent Spiner's best bud, which is why it's so Data-heavy.
-
@blakeyrat There was an ion storm approaching that didn't seem friendly, according to Geordi. That prevented the beaming.
-
@theBread But invading someone's planet with a shuttle and ATV both armed with phasers = friendly.
Like, they weren't in any hurry at that point, right? They could have just waited a day.
-
@blakeyrat The plot needed to move on though.
-
Will it damage my MacBook if I put it in the fridge to cool it down?
I've a got longstanding problem with laptops overheating (MacBook Air/Pro) and it's not only related to one machine. The laptops are overheating especially during hot days (summer). I've found that
Aren't MacBooks, like normal laptops, rated at 120 degrees Fahrenheit? Where the fuck is he working that:
- Is economically secure enough to reliably run a fridge
- But there's no AC to bring the temperature down into the 80s?
More likely, this guy's just a moron and his laptop's plain busted and needs repair.
-
Stop using Google Chrome for Mac
If Chrome alone is enough to overheat your macbook, your macbook is broken.
-
What would a Boeing 747 look like if it were left in a hangar for 5,000 years. Could it still be flown?
Assume a passenger aircraft were left undercover for a very long period, perhaps thousands of years, in a damp, arboreal environment. How much of it would survive? Which parts would remain intact, ...
Just linking this question because I like the top answer for it.
Also somehow nobody mentioned Battlefield: Earth yet, where it was a (particularly stupid) plot point that the humans could find 500 year old Harrier jets and they just flew with no problems at all.
