(3x edited*) I keep figuring out more

Add to your list

:01 Twilight Zone
*:30 Destination Moon (rocket)
:47 Logans Run, Back to the future, Men in Black, Rollerball
:55 Nineteen Eighty-Four
:57 THX 1138
1:01 Battlestar Galatica
*1:04 Matrix (red/blue pill in glasses reflection)
1:14 Star TreK (USS Enterprise (NCC-1701))
*1:14 Patches (Prometheus, Silent Running, Alien)
**1:21 Signage (War of the Worlds, Body Snatchers, Soylent Green)
1:28 Area 51
*2:16 Barbarella
2:24 ET
2:25 Outland (images on wall and logo in corner of video)
**2:26 Enemy Mine poster
2:29 Close Encounters
2:35 Alien
2:41 2001 Space Odyssey(monolith)?, Star Trek
*3:18 Dr. Who (dalek)

Here's a short list I managed to whip up

.33 MTV logo
.35 Trip to the Moon movie
.47 Eye of HAL
.55 MSTK3
.57 Dr. Who phonebooth
1:11 5th Element
1:14 Major Tom
1:46 Buckaroo Banzi
2:00 Day The Earth Stood Still robot
2:23-25 Robby Robot
2:41 Time Machine from the movie Time Machine
2:43 Max Headroom
3:36 Flash Gordon rocket ship

what he's doing is cool as a hobby, but he should really go get a physics or engineering degree to take it to the next level. (but then again, if his YouTube channel becomes popular, he'll make more money and have more fun than doing it professionally)

Also, those rocket engines aren't precise enough to use for landing. ±0.1 seconds of thrust makes no difference going up (for a model rocket) but for landing it's the difference between "reusable" and "busted".

I'm guessing that as each piece is added, it is already orbiting with the station exactly whether it's attached or not.

The station does need periodic boosts as there is some drag caused by atmospheric changes by the sun.

Disclaimer: Not a rocket scientist

Congratulations! Your video, Breathtaking rocket launch, as seen from the ISS, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 1 Badge!

Your video, Breathtaking rocket launch, as seen from the ISS, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

No. That's not the issue.
The issue is that when you are to the right of Goebbels, everything looks liberal and honest truth looks like a partisan attack. The right has not just run far right, they put on rocket shoes with wheels and warped right. What was considered a hard right position 20 years ago is now called hyper liberal by your ilk.
There is no excuse for the garbage "reporting" going on....at Fox, OAN, and Info Wars. None. It's not really reporting when you make up 90% and use each other as sources.

Kavanaugh was treated like a prince compared to Garland, a centrist judge confirmed unanimously by republicans before they lost their minds and souls to become the party of "Fuck you".
Fusion thing? You mean his crappy dietary supplements that he claims could make you the Adonis that Jones himself is? Um...yeah, that's obviously and undeniably a pack of lies concocted by Alex Jones. Duh.

Again, you choose to conflate imperfection on the left with inhumanity and consistent dishonesty and fraud from the top leadership on the right.
Obama did better stopping undocumented migrants out than Trump has without dehumanizing them or calling them murderers and rapists in obvious racist ploys to get his racist base excited, but you certainly disagree because and are certain Trump has done more because Trump calls them rapists and murderers, and implies that any middle eastern is a terrorist (but not angry white guys with guns and mail bombs, those are good people).

There may be more than enough scum to go around, but one side is nothing but lying fraudulent scumbags now, and it's not the left. Trump is a convicted fraud who defrauded poor students (and charities, and anyone he ever did business with) and is 100% incapable of being truthful even when his words are written for him, and the dishonesty seeped through the party like Ebola, leaving none uninfected. You look at 2 children, one with some mud on its face, the other slathered head to toe like a golem, and you say they're both dirty, plenty of mud on both sides. *facepalm

This system is used to reduce extreme heat and energy generated by a rocket launch. On Oct. 15, 2018, the Ignition Overpressure Protection and Sound Suppression water deluge system at Kennedy Space Center's Launch Pad 39B was tested, sending water about 100 feet in the air. The test is part of preparation for launching our Space Launch System rocket on Exploration Mission-1 and subsequent missions.

Modifications were made to the pad after a previous wet flow test, increasing the performance of the system. During launch, this water deluge system will release approximately 450,000 gallons of water across the mobile launcher and Flame Deflector. -yt

Hmmm......the site i ended up on indicated much less progress, perhaps I misunderstood and they were only discussing
DFRJ tests.
I trust wiki has it right.
I can't find any real info on the gll holod, but I would expect it was also launched with a solid rocket/missile if it wasn't pure propaganda. Scram jets just don't work under mach 4-5.

All you mention are a far cry from sustained hypersonic powered atmospheric flight, which is what we're talking about here.

You mentioned a ramjet, but scramjet engines are hardly an incremental improvement, they're an entirely different class of jet engine. Ramjet engines only do around mach 2.5- 5, scramjets 4-8+ theoretically. What's needed for a viable weapon imo is the next iteration of dual mode ramjets that can do both with one engine, that's a long way off. Public scramjet engine tests have only been successful in a few short 5 second+- burns so far, launched with conventional solid rockets.

A big part of the Zero's reputation came from racking up kills in China against a lot of second-rate planes with poorly-trained pilots. After all, there was a reason that the Republic of China hired the American Volunteer Group to help out during the Second Sino-Japanese War – Chinese pilots had a hard time cutting it.

The Wildcat was deficient in many ways versus the Zero, but it still had superior firepower via ammo loadout. The Zero carried very few 20mm rounds, most of it's ammo was 7.7mm. There are records of Japanese pilots unloading all their 7.7mm ammo on a Wildcat and it was still flyable. On the flip side, the Wildcat had an ample supply of .50 cal.

Stanley "Swede" Vejtasa was able to score seven kills against Japanese planes in one day with a Wildcat.

Yes, the discovery of the Akutan Zero helped the United States beat this plane. But MilitaryFactory.com notes that the Hellcat's first flight was on June 26, 1942 – three weeks after the raid on Dutch Harbor that lead to the fateful crash-landing of the Mitsubishi A6M flown by Tadayoshi Koga.

Marine Captain Kenneth Walsh described how he knew to roll to the right at high speed to lose a Zero on his tail. Walsh would end World War II with 17 kills. The Zero also had trouble in dives, thanks to a bad carburetor.

We were behind in technology for many reasons, but once the Hellcat started replacing the Wildcat, the Japanese Air Superiority was over. Even if they had maintained a lead in technology, as Russia showed in WW2, quantity has a quality all of it's own. We were always going to be able to field more pilots and planes than Japan would be able to.

As far as Soviet rockets, once we were stunned by the launch of Sputnik, we kicked into high gear. You can say what you will of reliability, consistency, and dependability, but exactly how many manned Soviet missions landed on the moon and returned? Other than Buran, which was almost a copy of our Space Shuttle, how many shuttles did the USSR field?

The Soviets did build some things that were very sophisticated and were, for a while, better than what we could field. The Mig-31 is a great example. We briefly lagged behind but have a much superior air capability now. The only advantages the Mig and Sukhoi have is speed, they can fire all their missiles and flee. If they are engaged however, they will lose if pilots are equally skilled.

As @newtboy has said, I am sure that Russia and China are working on military advancements, but the technology simply doesn't exist to make a Hypersonic missile possible at this point.

China is fielding a man portable rifle that can inflict pain, not kill, and there is no hard evidence that it works.

There is no proof that the Chinese have figured out the technology for an operational rail gun on land, let alone the sea. We also have created successful railguns, the problem is POWERING them repeatedly, especially onboard a ship. If they figured out a power source that will pull it off, then it is possible, but there is no concrete proof other than a photo of a weapon attached to a ship. Our experts are guessing they might have it functional by 2025, might...

China has shown that long range QEEC is possible. It has been around but they created the first one capable of doing it from space. The problem is, they had to jury rig it. Photons, or light, can only go through about 100 kilometers of optic fiber before getting too dim to reliably carry data. As a result, the signal needs to be relayed by a node, which decrypts and re-encrypts the data before passing it on. This process makes the nodes susceptible to hacking. There are 32 of these nodes for the Beijing-Shanghai quantum link alone.

The main issue with warfare today is that it really doesn't matter unless the battle is between one of the big 3. Which means that ANY action could provoke Nuclear conflict. Is Russia going to hypersonic missile one of our carriers without Nukes become an option on the table as a retaliation? Is China going to railgun a ship and risk nuclear war?

Hell no, no more than we would expect to blow up some major Russian or Chinese piece of military hardware without severe escalation! Which means we can create all the technological terrors we like, because we WON'T use them unless they somehow provide us a defense against nuclear annihilation.

So just like China and Russia steal stuff from us to build military hardware to counter ours, if they create something that is significantly better, we will began trying to duplicate it. The only thing which would screw this system to hell is if one of us actually did begin developing a successful counter measure to nukes. If that happens, both of the other nations are quite likely to threaten IMMEDIATE thermonuclear war to prevent that country from developing enough of the counter measures to break the tie.

When you have neither speed nor maneuverability, it's your own durability that is in question, not the opponents durability.

It took the capture of the Akutan zero, its repair, and U.S. flight testing, to work out countermeasures to the zero.

The countermeasures were basically :
- One surprise diving attack and run away with momentum, or just don't fight them.
- Else bait your pursuer into a head-on pass with an ally (Thatch weave) (which, is still a bad position, only it's bad for everyone.)

Zero had 20mm cannons. The F4F had .50's. The F4F did not out gun the zero. 20mms only need a couple rounds to down a plane.

Durability became a factor later in the war, after the U.S. brought in better planes, like the F4U, F6F, Mustang, etc... while the zero stagnated in near-original form, and Japan could not make planes like the N1K in meaningful quanitties, or even provide quality fuel for planes like the Ki84 to use full power.

History is history. We screwed up at the start of WW2. Hubris/pride/confidence made us dismiss technologies that came around to bite us in the ass hard, and cost a lot of lives.




Best rockets since the 1960's? Because it had the biggest rocket?
What about reliability, consistency, dependability.
If I had to put my own life on the line and go to space, and I had a choice, I would pick a Russian rocket.

-scheherazade

this is what happens when you smoke cannabis - rocket parts go into lectric cars by mistake!