Using Spice to verify a circuit works

It's mostly overpriced over-engineered junk designed to fight a conflict in the skies of Europe, against an enormously overblown Soviet "threat", that never happened I don't disagree. Missiles are cheap and pretty effective.

Even Iraq back in '91 a county so poor they hardly had a pot to piss in by First World standards managed to throw enough cheap crap in the air to make life really unpleasant for American pilots in the best modern hardware money could buy. and the US has only dirt-pounded poorer countries since.

Air power alone has accomplished little of lasting value in over 70 years other than pounding dirt and a lot of dead civilians. But boy howdy people love to throw (other people's) money at that stuff.

You been drinking again?

Reply to
bitrex
Loading thread data ...

On a sunny day (Tue, 18 Jun 2019 01:21:50 -0400) it happened bitrex wrote in :

Have no even had breakfast yet, now that you mention it...

Reply to
Jan Panteltje

The Space Shuttle was very much a dual-use vehicle and it scared the shit out of the Soviets. It also launched about a dozen or more military payloads most of which are still classified.

The large delta-wing configuration was dictated by the DoD - a pure scientific research reusable spacecraft wouldn't need them and could have been closer to the original concept:

and the large delta wings meant it had to be mounted lower down on the stack which caused problems later. But the large delta wing configuration also made the Shuttle a formidable weapons platform reasons left as an exercise to the reader :)

Reply to
bitrex

On a sunny day (Tue, 18 Jun 2019 01:50:38 -0400) it happened bitrex wrote in :

One of my favorite movies is

formatting link
it was brought down by a technician turned hacker commanded by the evil ruler.

BTW I am not sure Russia had much fear for the shuttle, they tried building their own and soon realized they were copying a useless POS :-) Russian rockets still today bring people to the ISS (an other useless endeavor, but now they make some money playing taxi to the ISS.

In the same way (tm) it would have been cheaper to launch an other hubble with a rocket then to fix it using the shuttle.

Now all focus is on high speed missiles and underwater nuclear armed autonomous mini crafts that will just silently lure in front of US harbors and attack if given the command.. or a 'we are still there' de-activation command sequence is not received for some time. Mr Putin presented some new tech last year:

formatting link

Remember China did a test successfully shooting down one of their own GPS like low orbiting sats..

That is the sensitive spot, ISS, and other low orbiting platforms, communication satellites, etc can just be shot down, deorbited even by ONE hacker, there is a hacker in the UK that did control a satellite already more than 10 years ago. Even a simple replay attack from what a control station transmits can send fatal information to satellites.

People have NO idea how vulnerable all that space ju^H^Hstuff is . Or the world for that matter.

The creation of fear for Russia just to get more money from the people for defense, well it is like McCarthy stile:

formatting link

Creating a common enemy to distract from the failures of the current leadership.

It looks that Trump is willing to attack Iran just to distract from his failures so he can win the next election. Very dangerous, it is all about his ego, not about the people or the country.

Reply to
Jan Panteltje

_tests/

The climate simulations have been running since the 1990's. The planet is w arming up a trifle faster than the collected simulations predicted - which is to say that the simulations that predicted a trifle more warming were mo re nearly correct.

All the simulations are various sorts of tractable over-simplications of a very complex reality, but they are informative.

Your preference is for believing what Anthony Watts is paid to tell you by the people who are making money out of extracting fossil carbon, and want t o keep making money out of it for as long as possible.

Lots of things. But ignoring the fairly predicable effects of sticking even more CO2 into the atmosphere has its own rather obvious downsides.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

he

ion_tests/

John Larkin's average time to egineer a "new" product is two weeks - or so he has told us.

Tweaking an existing product to suit a new customer isn't all that demandin g, and he probably can get away with relying on Spice simulations most of t he time.

Two weeks engineer time isn't a big investment.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

n

r the

n_tests/

The 737-Max hasn't been OK.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

They haven't. They've been predicting pretty much what has actually been ha ppening. Sea level rise isn't going to get serious until the Greenland and/ or West Antartic ice sheets start sliding off into the sea fast. That's not easily predictable

formatting link

Nobody ever claimed that we should all be dead by now.

Crop yields get better, until there is a drought. Life spans ditto.

But isn't going to "creep up" when the Greenland and/or West Antarctic ice sheets start sliding off into the ocean. They have about 10 metres of sea l evel rise locked up at the moment, and when ice sheets slide off (as they d id at the end of the last ice age) sea levels can rise by a metre per centu ry (up to 2.5 metres per century for some centuries

formatting link

Admittedly, the total sea level rise then was 120 metres, but it happened o ne ice sheet at a time.

Interglacials are "golden ages" compared with ice ages, but we've already p ut enough CO2 into the atmosphere to rule out a flip back to an ice age unt il the CO2 level gets back down below 300ppm - it's currently 414.7ppm and rising steadily.

There's anxiety about whether we'll get the planet warm enough to flip it i nto a hot spell - as it did 56 million years ago for the Paleocene-Eocene T hermal Maximum

formatting link

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

The F35 will be OK. Fighter planes don't dogfight any more. F35 is an electronics and missile platform.

I suspect that manned fighter planes and bombers will be obsolete soon anyhow.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

lol just choose the right prediction is all

m
Reply to
makolber

Nobody "deletes their mistakes". All the simulations get published and compared, and the predictions look rather like a Gaussian distribution.

The IPCC looks at the lot and reports the likeliest prediction - the peak of the distribution - and a range - full width at half maximum.

It isn't perfect, but they've done pretty well over the last decade or so.

It's a whole lot better than hoping that problem isn't actually real.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

Well life expectancy is going down in the US for the first time*, but I don't think that's because of the climate.

I read some report that said climate change would be a net good for the higher latitudes, (Canada, Northern US N. Asia, etc.) and net bad for the tropics and lower latitudes. (Sorry my friends in Oz)

George H. (Well, I guess it alos went down during the Spanish flu outbreak, ~1918-20)

Reply to
George Herold

True, but for more complicated reasons than simply in which venue they tested the relevant aspects of flight control software. Not like it wasn't tested by real test pilots in the real world, too. That also didn't seem to reveal any problems to them. From what I've read though either venue would have been sufficient, in hindsight.

That is to say neither simulation nor the real world can help you test edge cases by itself if you don't know and can't think up what it is you're looking for

Reply to
bitrex

More fuel-efficient engines have giant fans, and they would scrape the ground. Landing gear was extended as far as practical, and then the engine was moved forward and up. Airbus did similar things.

Moving the engine changed flight dynamics and introduced a hazard, which Boeing fixed with software, badly.

Most planes nowadays have computer based "flight laws" that stabilze things. Airbus planes are flown with a joystick that inputs data to a computer.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

Just read that they expect it to be in service in 2025.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

Actually, the single sensor 'fix' was the result of test flight issues. It just wasn't re-test-flighted.

RL

Reply to
legg

On a sunny day (Tue, 18 Jun 2019 07:04:12 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

We have those on order, there was one here last year, and really, going by the sound I thought one flew over here yesterday. There are 'air force days' somewhere not so far away, sort of where people can go and look what's there, not in the airport close to here this year. Anyways, F35 is not stealth, it is not stealth in the IR and it is not stealth in low frequency radar. It is also detectable by passive radar (via radio and TV station reflections, so also low frequency). It is a bad fighter, has only one engine (so more easily shot down), about everything you can think of in that thing is *wrong* including that fan for VTOL in some models. What the electronics in it does I have no idea, but it cannot make it fly better. It is a taxpayer payed scam.

Perhaps, sure missiles, rail-guns, lasers, what have you these days, will also be used. In a real global nuclear war after the first exchange not much will fly I'd think, but I could be wrong. For smaller scale conflicts it may or may not work, I like the F16 a lot better.

And the other side MIGs, do not know what China has.. But China invented the gunpowder and had rockets before any of us westerns, so who knows what they can come up with, now they already can shoot down sats.

Reply to
Jan Panteltje

Aircraft carriers are big billion-dollar targets. Vertical takeoff and land lets small ships become carriers. Or any field or parking lot become an airport.

China is struggling to build commercial planes and especially struggling to build jet engines. The engines are really hard.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

I sometimes design by fiddling and simulation, and don't actually understand the circuit until after the sim works. Why not?

No, simulations can, and do, fail but the hardware works fine. There are several reasons for that, one obvious one being bad models.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

On a sunny day (Tue, 18 Jun 2019 10:09:06 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

the UK had a nice one:

formatting link
them downgrading to a F35 would be a pity.

Yes, but they have great connections with Russia, and Russia has that experience,

I think China loves to jump into that market and get FAA approval, would flying with Russian engines be a problem? Just wondering...

Reply to
Jan Panteltje

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.