31–40 of 439 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What kind of airframe materials will they need for 9Gs? That sounds like too much for even aerospace Titanium.
9G shouldn't be a problem at all, from a material standpoint. Missiles go to 100G, and F1 engine pistons withstand 8.600G ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-force ).
Also in that table: Acceleration of a nematocyst: the fastest recorded acceleration from any biological entity. 5,410,000 g!
Why General Atomics? They are also yet another defense incumbent that needs to be disrupted. They make the Predator and other current UAVs, which are all expensive and uninteresting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_Aeronautical_S... In general I think the government needs to move contracts away from older companies and fund young innovative ones. Partnerships between young and old simply sustain the inc…
>They are also yet another defense incumbent that needs to be disrupted. The first and arguably only mission of the Department of Defense is to win wars. Diversifying the economy is none of their concern beyond having a economy with which to fuel their war machines. If you want diversification of the economy, look towards the Department of Commerce. Or to put it another way: Thumping your diversity drum doesn't win y…
Also I have no idea what this has to do with “diversity” or what you even mean by that.
Even though I never heard about Anduril before, this is now the second time in a day that I 'hear' about it. The first time was a post about the latest Mark Rober video 'promoting' Anduril/military technology to a child/teen audience. https://lemmy.ca/post/19761360 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrGENEXocJU
Why General Atomics? They are also yet another defense incumbent that needs to be disrupted. They make the Predator and other current UAVs, which are all expensive and uninteresting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_Aeronautical_S... In general I think the government needs to move contracts away from older companies and fund young innovative ones. Partnerships between young and old simply sustain the inc…
I assume andruil is doing the controller and consults on design, while GA largely does the aircraft. Building big aircrafts takes huge facilities, so it's not unreasonable to have a big incumbent doing this.
Why General Atomics? They are also yet another defense incumbent that needs to be disrupted. They make the Predator and other current UAVs, which are all expensive and uninteresting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_Aeronautical_S... In general I think the government needs to move contracts away from older companies and fund young innovative ones. Partnerships between young and old simply sustain the inc…
Because that's how the government operates. Same with the initial COTS and Commercial Crew awards to SpaceX: it was paired with a similar contracts to Orbital and Boeing, to make sure that if the untested startup failed there would be a traditional contractor ready to take up the slack.
NASA paid Boeing 4.5 billion and counting, SpaceX 2.6 billion. SpaceX launched astronauts to ISS 7 times, completely fulfilling the original contract, and continues to launch on new contracts with NASA. Meanwhile Boeing has yet to fly a single astronaut and required NASA to pay them extra for their own delays and failures.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their website says .95 Mach and 9Gs… in simulation. It’s definitely going to be high powered.
What kind of airframe materials will they need for 9Gs? That sounds like too much for even aerospace Titanium.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>They are also yet another defense incumbent that needs to be disrupted. The first and arguably only mission of the Department of Defense is to win wars. Diversifying the economy is none of their concern beyond having a economy with which to fuel their war machines. If you want diversification of the economy, look towards the Department of Commerce. Or to put it another way: Thumping your diversity drum doesn't win y…
Diversifying the economy is a pathway to winning wars. Limiting themselves to a few expensive and stagnant vendors is a way to lose in the future. Other countries make these things much more efficiently because they don’t have lazy governments captured by old companies. Also I have no idea what this has to do with “diversity” or what you even mean by that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because that's how the government operates. Same with the initial COTS and Commercial Crew awards to SpaceX: it was paired with a similar contracts to Orbital and Boeing, to make sure that if the untested startup failed there would be a traditional contractor ready to take up the slack.
Hopefully this time the incumbent doesn't get paid twice as much for a worse outcome, as happened with Commercial Crew... NASA paid Boeing 4.5 billion and counting, SpaceX 2.6 billion. SpaceX launched astronauts to ISS 7 times, completely fulfilling the original contract, and continues to launch on new contracts with NASA. Meanwhile Boeing has yet to fly a single astronaut and required NASA to pay them extra for thei…
I am genuinely curious. I was in the whole retail investor space since early 2010s which saw the EV hype. Workhorse was supposed to supply vans for federal postal vans, Nikola had that GM deal going on etc.
Hanging around retail investor space helped made me be very skeptical about the idea of enterprise led innovation. Contract like this in my opinion requires seasoned engineering managers who have survived decades of bureaucracy but never forgot the essence of no-BS engineering. I believe SpaceX was able to bring some of these people in before they had a functional rocket. Where does Anduril stands with their management and innovation?