• Re: Porting VMS versus building a new spacecraft

    From Mark Daniel@21:1/5 to Simon Clubley on Fri Jun 7 22:30:24 2024
    On 7/6/2024 22:06, Simon Clubley wrote:
    $ set response/mode=good_natured

    It occurred to me yesterday that Elon Musk has been able to build and successfully fly (mostly) a new rocket and spacecraft in less time than
    it has taken to port VMS to x86-64. :-)

    Simon.

    A distinct advantage of not having to maintain backward compatibility.

    --
    Anyone, who using social-media, forms an opinion regarding anything
    other than the relative cuteness of this or that puppy-dog, needs
    seriously to examine their critical thinking.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Simon Clubley@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 7 12:36:15 2024
    $ set response/mode=good_natured

    It occurred to me yesterday that Elon Musk has been able to build and successfully fly (mostly) a new rocket and spacecraft in less time than
    it has taken to port VMS to x86-64. :-)

    Simon.

    --
    Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
    Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dave Froble@21:1/5 to Simon Clubley on Fri Jun 7 09:31:44 2024
    On 6/7/2024 8:36 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
    $ set response/mode=good_natured

    It occurred to me yesterday that Elon Musk has been able to build and successfully fly (mostly) a new rocket and spacecraft in less time than
    it has taken to port VMS to x86-64. :-)

    Simon.


    Yeah, enough money can do that.

    --
    David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
    Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
    DFE Ultralights, Inc.
    170 Grimplin Road
    Vanderbilt, PA 15486

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=C3=B8j?=@21:1/5 to Simon Clubley on Fri Jun 7 09:20:44 2024
    On 6/7/2024 8:36 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
    $ set response/mode=good_natured

    It occurred to me yesterday that Elon Musk has been able to build and successfully fly (mostly) a new rocket and spacecraft in less time than
    it has taken to port VMS to x86-64. :-)

    Money is a good fuel for making things happen.

    SpaceX has received a lot of money in funding.

    Per wikipedia:

    early - 100 M$ Musk + 100 M$ other + 800 M$ NASA
    2015 - 1 B$ Google and Fidelity
    2017 - 350 M$
    2019 - 1.33 B$
    2020 - 1.9 B$
    2021 - 1.61 B$

    I am willing to predict that if VSI has received billions
    of dollars in funding then they could have gotten VMS x86-86
    done faster.

    VAX->Alpha was done by DEC when they were still one of
    the biggest IT companies in the world. Alpha->Itanium
    was done by HP when HP was one of the biggest IT companies
    in the world.

    Arne

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Mark Daniel on Fri Jun 7 23:50:57 2024
    On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:30:24 +0930, Mark Daniel wrote:

    It occurred to me yesterday that Elon Musk has been able to build and
    successfully fly (mostly) a new rocket and spacecraft in less time than
    it has taken to port VMS to x86-64. :-)

    A distinct advantage of not having to maintain backward compatibility.

    It could have been done in less time, by building on top of another OS
    that was already native to the new architecture.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Stephen Hoffman@21:1/5 to Simon Clubley on Mon Jun 10 16:02:06 2024
    On 2024-06-07 12:36:15 +0000, Simon Clubley said:

    $ set response/mode=good_natured

    It occurred to me yesterday that Elon Musk has been able to build and successfully fly (mostly) a new rocket and spacecraft in less time than
    it has taken to port VMS to x86-64. :-)

    The "move fast and break things" technical strategy employed at SpaceX
    tends to be decidedly unpopular around here. 🚀💥 Once past its
    initial development, Falcon has been a very solid platform. How that
    works for Starship?

    Semi-related viewing from Perun: The New Space Race, SpaceX & Starship
    - Satellite constellations & Launcher Evolution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=effFp6AnCWo




    --
    Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Single Stage to Orbit@21:1/5 to Stephen Hoffman on Mon Jun 10 22:46:00 2024
    On Mon, 2024-06-10 at 16:02 -0400, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
    It occurred to me yesterday that Elon Musk has been able to build
    and successfully fly (mostly) a new rocket and spacecraft in less
    time than it has taken to port VMS to x86-64. :-)

    The "move fast and break things" technical strategy employed at
    SpaceX tends to be decidedly unpopular around here.  🚀💥 Once past
    its initial development, Falcon has been a very solid platform. How
    that works for Starship?

    Not so well for Boeing. Numerous issues with their StarLiner despite
    being paid billions, whilst SpaceX got the job done for far less.
    Perhaps there's something to be said for that development model, as
    long as there's a strong focus on safety.
    --
    Tactical Nuclear Kittens

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=C3=B8j?=@21:1/5 to Single Stage to Orbit on Mon Jun 10 19:02:36 2024
    On 6/10/2024 5:46 PM, Single Stage to Orbit wrote:
    On Mon, 2024-06-10 at 16:02 -0400, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
    It occurred to me yesterday that Elon Musk has been able to build
    and successfully fly (mostly) a new rocket and spacecraft in less
    time than it has taken to port VMS to x86-64. :-)

    The "move fast and break things" technical strategy employed at
    SpaceX tends to be decidedly unpopular around here.  🚀💥 Once past
    its initial development, Falcon has been a very solid platform. How
    that works for Starship?

    Not so well for Boeing. Numerous issues with their StarLiner despite
    being paid billions, whilst SpaceX got the job done for far less.
    Perhaps there's something to be said for that development model, as
    long as there's a strong focus on safety.

    I got the impression that Boeing does not have a problem with
    StarLiner but that Boing simply has a problem.

    737, 787, StarLiner, T-7, KC-46, Air Force One.

    Arne

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dave Froble@21:1/5 to Single Stage to Orbit on Mon Jun 10 21:49:59 2024
    On 6/10/2024 5:46 PM, Single Stage to Orbit wrote:
    On Mon, 2024-06-10 at 16:02 -0400, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
    It occurred to me yesterday that Elon Musk has been able to build
    and successfully fly (mostly) a new rocket and spacecraft in less
    time than it has taken to port VMS to x86-64. :-)

    The "move fast and break things" technical strategy employed at
    SpaceX tends to be decidedly unpopular around here. 🚀💥 Once past
    its initial development, Falcon has been a very solid platform. How
    that works for Starship?

    Not so well for Boeing. Numerous issues with their StarLiner despite
    being paid billions, whilst SpaceX got the job done for far less.
    Perhaps there's something to be said for that development model, as
    long as there's a strong focus on safety.


    It is problematic to ass-u-me that an idea will work. Much better to test. The
    test may fail, but, possibly why will be learned, and another method tried, tested, and if it works, sort of "proven". Real "proven" would be multiple tests, not just one.

    Boeing spends lots of money on speculation. Space-X tests and knows what works, or, what must be improved. Lots to be said for the Space-X development model.

    --
    David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
    Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
    DFE Ultralights, Inc.
    170 Grimplin Road
    Vanderbilt, PA 15486

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Simon Clubley@21:1/5 to arne@vajhoej.dk on Tue Jun 11 12:44:47 2024
    On 2024-06-10, Arne Vajhj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
    On 6/10/2024 5:46 PM, Single Stage to Orbit wrote:

    Not so well for Boeing. Numerous issues with their StarLiner despite
    being paid billions, whilst SpaceX got the job done for far less.
    Perhaps there's something to be said for that development model, as
    long as there's a strong focus on safety.

    I got the impression that Boeing does not have a problem with
    StarLiner but that Boing simply has a problem.

    737, 787, StarLiner, T-7, KC-46, Air Force One.


    Boeing's problem is that the beancounters took over from the engineers
    during the merger. We are now seeing the results of that.

    Of course, this short-term next-quarter attitude is the same problem that
    is affecting way too many critical companies here in the West for the last couple of decades.

    I would also argue that this is also a failure of multiple governments in multiple countries in that they should never have allowed the companies
    within their control to weaken the infrastructure of the countries in
    question with outsourcing and replacement of experienced employees.

    These countries (including the US) are no longer in control of their own destiny due to the outsourcing of critical infrastructure and manufacturing infrastructure. Of course, in the case of the UK, we are about to find out
    if the next bunch of jokers will be any better than the current bunch of jokers...

    I recently watched some historical documentaries about the US during the 1950s/1960s because I wanted to know more about US military technologies
    and capabilities during that time period. I wonder if the US today could
    even build a modern-day DEW line let alone how long it would take _if_
    they could still do it. :-(

    IOW, the Boeing problems are just a symptom of a far larger problem in
    our societies in how, thanks to this short-term and "me, me, me!!!" thinking, we have lost control of the long-term destiny of our societies.

    Simon.

    --
    Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
    Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Simon Clubley@21:1/5 to Stephen Hoffman on Tue Jun 11 12:21:08 2024
    On 2024-06-10, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
    On 2024-06-07 12:36:15 +0000, Simon Clubley said:

    $ set response/mode=good_natured

    It occurred to me yesterday that Elon Musk has been able to build and
    successfully fly (mostly) a new rocket and spacecraft in less time than
    it has taken to port VMS to x86-64. :-)

    The "move fast and break things" technical strategy employed at SpaceX
    tends to be decidedly unpopular around here. ?? Once past its
    initial development, Falcon has been a very solid platform. How that
    works for Starship?


    The most exciting thing about Falcon is that Elon Musk has made space
    access routine.

    Also, thanks to him, we are now close to having the technology that
    could be used to build a Thunderbird 3 for real. Technology that was
    once just futuristic science fiction is on the verge of becoming reality.
    Think about _that_ for a moment and about how far we have come over the
    last 10 years...

    (Hmmm, perhaps someone should put that TB3 idea into his head for real. :-))

    Simon.

    --
    Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
    Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Stephen Hoffman@21:1/5 to Simon Clubley on Tue Jun 11 18:46:47 2024
    On 2024-06-11 12:44:47 +0000, Simon Clubley said:

    I recently watched some historical documentaries about the US during
    the 1950s/1960s because I wanted to know more about US military
    technologies and capabilities during that time period. I wonder if the
    US today could even build a modern-day DEW line let alone how long it
    would take _if_ they could still do it. :-(

    We're nowhere near done cleaning up the mess from that era, including
    Camp Century.

    As for the intended warning purpose—and ignoring the many messes those efforts have caused—one of the declassified details we know a very
    little something about from a system not that long after DEW was
    decommissioned is the so-called Vela incident.

    Current (public) system is SBIRS, and a development prototype of a LEO
    system known as Blackjack, and work on Starshield LEO system with
    SpaceX is currently underway.

    And US Space Force wants what amount to suborbital taxis with eighty
    short tons delivered ~anywhere in an hour, and certainly wouldn't mind
    having access to UD-4L Cheyenne, D77 Pelican, or other orbital
    dropships. "We're in the pipe, 5x5."

    As for OpenVMS, VSI is not moving particularly fast. Or they're being exceedingly quiet about it. And I'm not sure the VSI investor is
    inclined to spend a chunk of a billion dollars to build a new OS. Or to
    build a rocket.

    Not to HAARP on anything or anyone, of course.


    --
    Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)