Fandom, TV

Is This Planet Protected?

1,026,891 Comments

The new season of Doctor Who began today with a very triumphant debut of the Eleventh Doctor. There is a definite shift in tone from the previous series (or non-series as it was), and I think this is exactly the episode to reset with. The introduction of Amy Pond was the best companion beginning yet, and I already love her. The rest of the plot didn’t really blow my mind, but the nod to the previous Doctors was glorious and brought out an actual cheer. I think Eleven is a very capable incarnation and I look forward to seeing him in action week after week.

I’m already re-watching because I let a lot of information slip past me the first time. I also want to compile a list of “clues” to watch for as the series progresses because I think there will be quite the payoff with this writing team. For instance, there is a blue lens flare that lingers for a considerable amount of time when there is no known source of light for that scene. Hmmmm. I’m also curious about the possible significance of the “Myth” laptop. Each of those things may be inconsequential, of course, or they could be related to the coming Silence. Who knows?

Who knows, indeed!! *ahem*

1,026,891 thoughts on “Is This Planet Protected?”

  7. Most plane crashes are ‘survivable’
    kraken ?????
    First, the good news. “The vast majority of aircraft accidents are survivable, and the majority of people in accidents survive,” says Galea. Since 1988, aircraft — and the seats inside them — must be built to withstand an impact of up to 16G, or g-force up to 16 times the force of gravity. That means, he says, that in most incidents, “it’s possible to survive the trauma of the impact of the crash.”

    For instance, he classes the initial Jeju Air incident as survivable — an assumed bird strike, engine loss and belly landing on the runway, without functioning landing gear. “Had it not smashed into the concrete reinforced obstacle at the end of the runway, it’s quite possible the majority, if not everyone, could have survived,” he says.

    The Azerbaijan Airlines crash, on the other hand, he classes as a non-survivable accident, and calls it a “miracle” that anyone made it out alive.
    https://kra26c.cc
    ??????
    Most aircraft involved in accidents, however, are not — as suspicion is growing over the Azerbaijan crash — shot out of the sky.

    And with modern planes built to withstand impacts and slow the spread of fire, Galea puts the chances of surviving a “survivable” accident at at least 90%.

    Instead, he says, what makes the difference between life and death in most modern accidents is how fast passengers can evacuate.

    Aircraft today must show that they can be evacuated in 90 seconds in order to gain certification. But a theoretical evacuation — practiced with volunteers at the manufacturers’ premises — is very different from the reality of a panicked public onboard a jet that has just crash-landed.
    Galea, an evacuation expert, has conducted research for the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) looking at the most “survivable” seats on a plane. His landmark research, conducted over several years in the early 2000s, looked at how passengers and crew behaved during a post-crash evacuation, rather than looking at the crashes themselves. By compiling data from 1,917 passengers and 155 crew involved in 105 accidents from 1977 to 1999, his team created a database of human behavior around plane crashes.

    His analysis of which exits passengers actually used “shattered many myths about aircraft evacuation,” he says. “Prior to my study, it was believed that passengers tend to use their boarding exit because it was the most familiar, and that passengers tend to go forward. My analysis of the data demonstrated that none of these myths were supported by the evidence.”

    Reply

  13. You actually make it seem so easy with your presentation but I find this topic to be actually something that I think I would never understand.

    It seems too complicated and very broad for me. I’m looking forward for
    your next post, I’ll try to get the hang of it!

    Here is my website – Erotikanzeigen

    Reply

  15. Thanks on your marvelous posting! I definitely enjoyed reading it, you might be a great author.I will make sure to bookmark your blog and may come
    back sometime soon. I want to encourage you to definitely continue your great work, have
    a nice afternoon!

    Reply

  19. What New Glenn will do
    In some ways, New Glenn has already made its mark on the launch industry. Blue Origin has for years pitched the rocket to compete with both SpaceX and United Launch Alliance — a joint venture of Boeing and Lockheed Martin that buys engines from Blue Origin — for lucrative military launch contracts.
    omg omg
    The US Space Force selected Blue Origin, ULA and SpaceX in June to compete for $5.6 billion worth of Pentagon contracts for national security missions slated to launch over the next four years.
    Blue Origin also has deals with several commercial companies to launch satellites. The contracts include plans to help deploy Amazon’s Kuiper internet satellites and a recently inked deal with AST SpaceMobile to help launch the Midland, Texas-based company’s space-based cellular broadband network.

    New Glenn could also be instrumental in building Blue Origin’s planned space station, called Orbital Reef. Blue Origin and it commercial partners, including Sierra Space and Boeing, among others, hope the station will one day provide a new destination for astronauts as the International Space Station is phased out of service.
    https://omgprice10.com
    omg ?????? ?? ????
    New Glenn vs. other powerful rockets
    New Glenn packs significant power. Dubbed a “heavy-lift” vehicle, its capabilities lie between SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket and the more powerful Falcon Heavy launch vehicle.

    SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9, for example, can haul up to 22.8 metric tons (50,265 pounds) to space. While New Glenn is capable of carrying about double that mass, it may also be roughly the same price as a Falcon 9: reportedly around $60 million to $70 million per launch.

    “I think in order to compete with Falcon 9, you have to go head-to-head or better on price,” said Caleb Henry, the director of research at Quilty Space, which provides data and analysis about the space sector.

    The question, however, is whether Blue Origin will be able to sustain a competitive price point, Henry added.

    Still, one feature that makes New Glenn stand out is its large payload fairing, or nose cone. The component protects the cargo bay and is a whopping 23 feet (7 meters) wide — nearly 6 feet (2 meters) larger than that of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy.

    Henry said Blue Origin likely opted to outfit New Glenn with such a large fairing in order to help fulfill Bezos’ vision of the future.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *