I’m sorry. How do you expect a jet flying to get even close enough to a satellite to accelerate a missile to it?

Highest ever flow fixed wing “aircraft” is SpaceShipOne with rocket engines. Well above what a typical fighter jet might do: 112km height at 910m/s And a typical rocket will go what? Mach 2 or 3? So let’s say Mach 4 at 112 km, which is 1096 m/s

A typical Starlink orbit is either around 340km height or more typical 550km at either 7726 m/s or 7613 m/s at the different heights.

That gives a minimum distance traveled of at least 228km and a speed gap of 6630 m/s or 23868 km/h that the missile still needs to close.

There are probably ways that Brazil could try and destroy satellites if they want to. But launching missiles from (rocket powered) jets definitely isn’t one of them.

Don’t get your hopes up. Apparently the latest RoR2 expansion was made by the new Gearbox crew and that didn’t work out so well…

How is it nonsense?

The EU law is that the reject all should be exactly as easy as the accept all button. 1 extra click, however minor of an inconvenience it is, is extra effort. And therefore strictly speaking in violation of the law.

Nothing will ever happen but it’s valid criticism.

It’s just a guy talking 99% of the time and the few visuals that are in the movie are not required to understand the story. I’d just listen to it like a podcast. The guys voice and pronunciation probably beats text to speech from a blogpost with images.

Well you say that but their pit wall on Friday said otherwise

But MS had nothing to do with both the testing and rollout?

It’s a broken 3rd party component. Croudstrikes testing and rollout procedures were inadequate.

But that is an easily solved problem. Take the design of the James Webb, substitute the super cooled infrared camera and replace it with a superconducting magnet setup. Fly this setup to L1 of mars and start global warming.

I didn’t come up with that. Someone at NASA did. Years ago: https://astrobiology.nasa.gov/news/how-to-give-mars-an-atmosphere-maybe/

Surprisingly, no. Most inverters in the EU must come with island protection. Meaning that if there is no AC from the grid it immediatly switches off the inverter or the battery, there is no stand alone operation.

There are some systems that allow it but they are rare here and require the mains side to be fed trough the inverter itsself ensuring it’s never back feeding into the grid when there is no power with the same island protection, or less commonly there is a transfer switch of some kind also eliminating the issue. And either should obviously have a main kill switch on the breaker board for emergencies that also switches off the in home power with 1 action.

But most importantly, either of those options is not plug and play and will require an electrician that hopefully does know what he’s doing.

The cables in your walls are designed for a certain maximum current before they start to heat up. This current is limited by your breaker.

Now if you introduce a plug in solar setup your current is limited by your maximum breaker capacity + whatever your solar setup can generate.

So if I’d use the specs from the article and apply it to a normal dutch home situation: 16A breaker, + 800W at 230V, which means ~3.5A = 19.5A max. which is probably still fine for short durations.

But now some genius doesn’t read the fine print and hooks up 2 or 3 on the same circuit. There is no electrician that tells him that’s dangerous because it’s all self installed and he doesn’t know any better. And all of a sudden you are up to 26.5A and you got glowing, smoking wires in your walls…