News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird by bombcar on Thursday March 30, 2023 @02:21PM (#35376952)
> It's truly incredible that the A12/SR-71 aircraft was designed without the benefit of modern computing.

One of the huge things that computers give us is the ability to simulate where the design limits actually are - you can "relatively" easily design a device that needs to do "at least X" but once you're done, you don't really know how far past X you can go - computer simulations can help discover where and what exactly fails.

(Some limits like boat "hull speed" are easier to find than others).

Re:Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird by Fatnino on Thursday March 30, 2023 @03:34PM (#35377789)
The computer allows you to cut down your design so that it will do "at least X and no more" so you can save a few cents and then the plane falls apart when the pilot asks it to do Mach 3.6 but that's OK because the manual said it will top out at 3.5
Re:Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird by ithkuil on Thursday March 30, 2023 @04:33PM (#35378470)
"Any idiot can build a bridge that stands, but it takes an (computer assisted?) engineer to build a bridge that barely stands"
Re:Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird by bombcar on Thursday March 30, 2023 @05:14PM (#35378912)
It's actually an interesting problem from a "total effort" viewpoint.

There's zero reason to design a kitchen to last 100 years if the average one will be remodeled in 7 and even the oldest won't go past 20.

But other things can be designed to last significantly longer, and be used way past their "original expected lifespan" - many of the buildings in Europe, for example, have lasted centuries.

Re:Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird by ithkuil on Thursday March 30, 2023 @05:25PM (#35379010)
True.

That said, w.r.t old buildings, selection bias may play a significant role, perhaps bigger than intentions

Re:Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird by bombcar on Thursday March 30, 2023 @05:41PM (#35379161)
And maintenance costs, too. You may have a bridge that's 100 years old but you're paying 1/10 a new bridge in maintenance every year - not noticeable.
Re:Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird by ithkuil on Friday March 31, 2023 @03:26AM (#35383798)
There are also other factors. Imagine you gave a 500yo bridge that is low maintenance and has stood the test of time and all those nice things, but you can't carry the weight of modern vehicles, or if it's not wide enough for modern vehicles etc etc

One of the many tradeoffs in design is how much do you want to spend in preparing for anticipated future demands.

Striking example in my home town of Zagreb. Communist city planners at the time designed new neighbourhood with plenty of parking space because one day productivity advancements will give every family a car to own and they need to have a place to park it!

A few decades later you couldnt find a parking space anywhere because every family had two or three cars!