Dmitry Tananko

"As atrações dessa abordagem de "capital leve" eram muitas: Sindicatos problemáticos, oficinas caras e orçamentos de desenvolvimento se tornariam problema de outra pessoa. Os principais indicadores financeiros melhorariam instantaneamente à medida que os custos fossem transferidos para os balanços de outras empresas. Com seu foco em menos, a abordagem tinha uma semelhança superficial com a produção enxuta. Mas, enquanto a produção enxuta devolvia o conhecimento para o chão de fábrica, esta abordagem expulsava o chão de fábrica e seu conhecimento pela porta afora.' https://lnkd.in/duHbbxCU

3

So Silicon Valley (my old stamping ground!) is getting into battlefiedl UAV/Drones with a vengeance! Suspect we might see more of this type of UAV technology/invention coming from the Bay Area? "UAV/Drones have changed war. Small, cheap, and deadly robots buzz in the skies high above the world’s battlefields, taking pictures and dropping explosives. They’re hard to counter. ZeroMark, a defense startup based in the United States, thinks it has a solution. It wants to turn the rifles of frontline soldiers into “handheld Iron Domes.” "The idea is simple: Make it easier to shoot a drone out of the sky with a bullet. The problem is that drones are fast and maneuverable, making them hard for even a skilled marksman to hit. ZeroMark’s system would add aim assistance to existing rifles, ostensibly helping soldiers put a bullet in just the right place." “We’re mostly a software company,” ZeroMark CEO Joel Anderson tells WIRED. He says that the way it works is by placing a sensor on the rail mount at the front of a rifle, the same place you might put a scope. The sensor interacts with an actuator either in the stock or the foregrip of the rifle that makes adjustments to the soldier’s aim while they’re pointing the rifle at a target." "A soldier beset by a drone would point their rifle at the target, turn on the system, and let the actuators solidify their aim before pulling the trigger. “So there’s a machine perception, computer vision component. We use lidar and electro-optical sensors to detect drones, classify them, and determine what they’re doing,” Anderson says. “The part that is ballistics is actually quite trivial … It’s numerical regression, it’s ballistic physics.” "According to Anderson, ZeroMarks’ system is able to do things a human can’t. “For them to be able to calculate things like the bullet drop and trajectory and windage … It’s a very difficult thing to do for a person, but for a computer, it’s pretty easy,” he says. “And so we predetermined where the shot needs to land so that when they pull the trigger, it’s going to have a high likelihood of intersecting the path of the drone.” #uavdronetechnology #uavdronedefense #militaryuavdrones https://lnkd.in/ekYHNq9V

2

Recently the announcement from ex-NASA engineer, Dr. Charles Buhler ( founder of Exodus Propulsion Technologies, patent application WO2020159603A) about the claimed breakthrough in electrostatic energy and propulsion generated some level of talk in some circles about how this can change everything. Because Dr. Charles has been involved in a couple of NASA programs such as the Hubble, Space Shuttle and the ISS, his claims should be given some investigative study. My views > This is not possible and is flawed. Why >> 1. It is claimed that there is a new force that continues to generate field force even when high voltage source is switched off, that mathematical substitution (of epsilon e squared) based on the empirical data obtained from the team's tests, in both atmospheric, and high vacuum environment proves this is valid. 1.S.1 - This is not valid, because in the atmospheric tests the capacitance function of compounds in air is not factored. In both atmospheric and high vacuum test environment the flow field of the Earth's magnetic force is not factored into the quantum equations that the said team had proposed. 1.S.2 - In the same you-tube presentation and in the patent filing, Dr. Charles acknowledged that the high voltage (currently trial tested at around 5 - 7kV) cannot exceed 70kV to cause charge ionization breakdown. This reinforces the need to empirically test the ionization cycle from 0V right up to the breakdown voltage, which the team did no such proof of test against the claimed breakthrough. 2. It is claimed that in the company's high vacuum tests that the empirical data indicates 4460 uN of continuous thrust against gravity at the specified vacuum chamber pressure at a current draw of 3500 vDC, 228 micro watts. 2.S.1 - Based on this and Dr. Charles representation of quantum mechanics where epsilon e is again substituted alpha, then the continuous thrust will vary at different poles or even continents on Earth, and at different planet orbital band velocity. 2.S.2 - Based on mathematical and empirical data-sets presented, the technical conjecture is unfortunately incorrect because the light constant is still assumed correct, when quantum physicists all around the world are trying to extrapolate the Canary island test data, among a few others. 2.S.3.1R - The fastest method by which the claims can be invalidated, or validated, is the replication of the same tests in different locations on Earth at varying altitudes, which will then show that this claimed "unknown" force will be different at voltages right up to the breakdown value. Having an excellent track record and highly competent credentials, does not equate to having to use yet-to-be-determined science to make claims such as these. #technology #innovation #money https://lnkd.in/gwdm8uSc

2

Since a few years, the largest and most prestigious aerospace organization in the world (30,000 members), the American Institute for Aeronautics & Astronautics (AIAA), has formed a dedicated committee of high-profile professionals, organizing a specific UAP panel at AIAA conferences welcoming scientific papers to stimulate an open discussion on such a complex and multi-disciplinary topic (including material science, relativistic physics, propulsion, RF communication, electromagnetism, plasma physics, hypersonics, etc.). Whether some people accept it or not (an increasing number of people do...), UAP has been established as a topic worth of scientific study in the space science/engineering community. Potential outcomes can lead to a giant leap in scientific knowledge towards developing revolutionary space and green energy technologies. Add to this the need for ensuring safety for both military and civil flights in presence of these objects.

8

7 Comments

Enhancing Anomaly Detection with Adaptive Noise: A Pseudo Anomaly Approach Researchers proposed a method that involves creating pseudo anomalies by incorporating adaptive noise into normal data. This is achieved by training another network to generate noise based on normal input, which is then added to the input to create pseudo anomalies. By training an AE to poorly reconstruct these pseudo anomalies, the reconstruction boundary evolves, improving anomaly detection. Unlike methods with strong inductive bias, this approach is generic and applicable across diverse domains, as demonstrated across various datasets. Their method aims to enhance anomaly detection by training an AE to reconstruct normal input well while poorly reconstructing anomalies, achieved by incorporating learned adaptive noise into the normal data. This noise, generated by another autoencoder, creates pseudo anomalies, which are reconstructed poorly by the AE. The training process ensures that the AE evolves its reconstruction boundary towards improved anomaly detection. Unlike methods with strong inductive bias, this approach is generic and applicable across various domains. During testing, anomaly scores are computed based on reconstruction error, offering efficient inference without additional computational cost.

4

“Pentagon and DoD are going into manufacturing? Why does the Pentagon feel the need to add tech manufacturing to their purview?” The Pentagon and DoD in Manufacturing "A Strategic and a Necessary Evolution" The Department of Defense (DoD) has recently undertaken significant initiatives to bolster its manufacturing capabilities. This shift is driven by a combination of strategic needs and the evolving global landscape. Key Initiatives 1. National Defense Industrial Strategy (NDIS) - Launched in January 2024, this strategy aims to modernize the defense industrial base, making it more robust, resilient, and capable of rapid production to meet the needs of the US. 2. Manufacturing Technology (ManTech) Program - The DoD ManTech program focuses on identifying and closing manufacturing capability gaps. It aims to advance manufacturing technologies, strengthen joint planning, expand outreach, and develop the manufacturing workforce. 3. Additive Manufacturing Strategy - Released in 2021, this strategy promotes the use of additive manufacturing (3D printing) within the DoD. It provides a roadmap for integrating this technology to enhance supply chain agility, reduce lead times, and enable innovative solutions for sustainment challenges. 4. Distributed Bioindustrial Manufacturing Program (DBMIP) - Announced in 2024, this initiative focuses on strengthening domestic supply chains for biomanufacturing. Strategic Rationale 1. Supply Chain Resilience - developing and controlling key manufacturing technologies, the DoD can mitigate risks associated with global supply chain disruptions, which have become increasingly common due to geopolitical tensions and pandemics. 2. Technological Dominance - Maintaining technological superiority is crucial for national security. The DoD’s initiatives aim to foster innovation and keep pace with advancements in manufacturing. 3. Economic Security - The DoD recognizes that economic security and national security are intertwined. Strengthening the domestic industrial base not only supports military needs but also drives economic growth and job creation within the U.S. #Pentagon #DoD #Manufacturing #NationalSecurity #DefenseInnovation

3

💥 Rocket Facts! 💥 #51: Rocketdyne Tripropellant Engine Liquid rocket engine combustion is a lot like sex.  Normally, two parties – a fuel and an oxidizer – meet, they hit it off, sparks fly, and BANG, they get to thrustin’.  Sometimes, a fuel isn’t in the mood to hook up with a partner for a good time, so it closes the curtains, lights a candle, and takes care of itself.  But, every once a while in the world of combustion innuendo, the freaks come out to play.  And they get nasty.  Put the kids to bed, and let’s talk about the saucy menage-a-trois that was Rocketdyne’s tri-propellant engine. Specific impulse, or Isp, is a performance measure that tells you how much thrust you get for every pound of propellant you burn.  Higher Isp = more thrust from less propellant.  The best performing chemical rockets today burn liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen and produce upwards of 460 seconds of Isp.  (The units of Isp is a story for another #rocketfact.)  That standard was set when Pratt & Whitney developed the RL10 engine over six decades ago and has held since.   For contrast, the methane-burning vacuum Raptor made by every fanboy’s favorite rocket shop has an Isp of about 380 seconds. LH2/LOX is sporty as fuck, but it’s not the highest Isp combination out there.  Back in the late 60’s, Rocketdyne toyed around with an ugly mixture of hydrogen, liquid lithium, and liquid fluorine – an oxidizer so powerful it can oxidize oxygen.  To make the magic happen, hydrogen and liquid fluorine were injected into an ox-rich combustion chamber (no igniter necessary since the fluorine was so reactive, it started combusting upon contact with the hydrogen).  The molten lithium was then injected downstream and reacted with the remaining fluorine.  In reality, the fluorine and lithium were the primary fuel and oxidizer and the hydrogen was added since it was lightweight and could therefore be accelerated out the nozzle to extremely high velocities, boosting performance. A series of tests were conducted at Rocketdyne’s Santa Susana facility near L.A., the spiciest of which achieved a measured Isp of 542 seconds.  To this day, it is the highest Isp value ever measured for a chemical rocket engine. The tests made a fairly successful proof of concept, but also raised issues of feasibility as a flight engine.  Not only are fluorine and lithium highly reactive (with damn near everything, including plumbing), but the hydrogen and fluorine have to be kept freezing cold, while the lithium needs to be piping hot.  And never mind the nastiness of the combustion products.  Did you know that hydrofluoric acid will dissolve the sand out of concrete?  Sad to say, the Rocketdyne tri-prop was relegated to the annals of interesting rocket history. Excellent video linked in the comments.  The narrator speaks with a British accent, so by default, he is way more authoritative than I am!  I warn you, though…DO NOT watch the last three minutes. #rocketfacts #stemuncensored

137

22 Comments

Several companies are investigating hypersonic air-breathing vehicles. These are vehicles that draw the oxidizer from the air like jet engines. Reaching hypersonic speeds would be to Mach 5+. The easiest approach to these speeds is to use ramjets. Scramjets can reach even higher speeds but are a much more difficult technological task. I found the most promising approach that taken by Hermeus. They were able to keep costs down by using already existing turbojet engines and modifying them to operate in a ramjet mode: Building the World's 1st Hypersonic Airplane | Hermeus. https://lnkd.in/ecCP2Ezt But a key fact about the hypersonic air-breathing vehicles is how much they can subtract off from the delta-v needed to reach orbit. Mach 5.5 is about 5.5*340 m/s = 1,870 m/s. But ramjets can also operate at quite high altitudes, well above standard turbojets, to about 30+ km, 100,000+ feet. The equivalent delta-v for that altitude is about 800 m/s. Then ramjets can supply 1,870 + 800 = 2,670 m/s delta-v to orbit. It turns out the trajectories that use aerodynamic lift can subtract some amount from the needed delta-v to orbit, so call it 9,000 m/s needed for orbit using lifting trajectory. Then the delta-v that needs to be supplied by the upper stage would be 9,000 - 2,670 = 6,330 m/s. For expendable rockets the first stage commonly supplies about 4,000 m/s total delta-v speed+altitude with about 5,000+ m/s being supplied by the upper stage. But for rockets for which the first stage will be reusable like the Falcon 9 and the Superheavy booster, they supply a smaller total delta-v speed+altitude to the flight of about 3,000 m/s. This is so they can boost back to the launch site more easily. Then this means the air-breathing hypersonic vehicle can supply about the same total delta-v, speed+altitude, as the reusable booster. But the majorly important advantage is the air-breathing vehicle can be reused thousands of times, compared to only a few ten's of times for the rocket booster. Since the first stage by virtue of its large size commonly takes up 75% of the cost of a launcher, this means the cost of launch will be greatly reduced when that first stage can be reused thousands of times. The implications of this will be immense. It means for example despite SpaceX spending billions developing the SH/SS it may already be obsolete just by 2025 when hypersonic vehicles become operational and are used as the first stage of an orbital vehicle. I think the hypersonic advance will be successful, and will thereby be used to launch payloads to orbit as a first stage, greatly reducing costs.

1

The Military and Industry. It's Complex. I've attached an amazing article. Be aware this is "you get to read one a month unless you are a subscriber" but to me, it was worth my once a month shot.   I've been blessed with working at a company that doesn't face all of the challenges and shortcomings he defines, and with (many of the) customers in the defense space that are not dragged down by the issues he describes. But far too much of this article rings true to my own personal experience. Whether it is (occasional) agonizing concerns over trivialities that offer no benefit to the warfighter, or interminable paperwork delays, even the bright spot I inhabit has is momentary stumbling blocks. And true enough, the contractor has it's own challenges at times in maintaining a strong workforce and keeping our eyes on every aspect of complex execution. Later in the article, it becomes a pitch for Palantir's software. I don't have any particular doubt that it might well be successful, but I also know that the very business systems mandated in the current large-scale shipbuilding contracting environment would not allow for it's use in the manner it was intended. Just mentioning the letters "A" and "I" together already touched a third rail. It is particularly amusing that the very things that America had to offer Hyundai's Ulsan shipyard are specifically prohibited from being used at domestic shipyards working large military contracts. So much for the insights gleaned from the Korean field trip. But the bottom line is the bottom line...we see many dissertations that would make one think that it is 1938 all over again. But today the military-industrial complex is not motivated (by policy, process, or people), to generate the productivity we had needed to meet 1938's challenge. And changing that requires changing the toughest things there are to change... Policy direction, process streamlining, and peoples' perspectives. I have faith that we can collectively turn this around. Now it's time for the works. https://lnkd.in/ghTVe-TJ

7

2 Comments

I have partnered with the prestigious Association for Manufacturing Excellence (AME), and will be giving the next talk for their webinar series a week from today. I hope you can join, the details are below for my discussion titled: Leveraging AI for Manufacturing Excellence: Strategies and Solutions I always try to make my talks as interactive as possible, so if you have any particular topics or questions around AI in manufacturing, please message me and I will be happy to address them as part of the webinar if possible. Thanks, see you there! Nathan Eskue Original invitation: Join us on May 22nd for a transformative experience as we explore the latest trends in manufacturing. This is your chance to learn from industry leaders and gain insights that could redefine your business strategy and professional trajectory. What You'll Gain: - Expert Knowledge: Insights from top professionals in AI and manufacturing. - Networking Opportunities: Connect with industry peers facing similar challenges and opportunities. - Future Trends: Stay ahead with predictions that will shape the manufacturing landscape. 👉 Sign Up Now: https://lnkd.in/gwMxD7NS 📅 Date: May 22nd | 🕒 Time: 12-00 PM - 1:00 PM EST Don’t miss out! Spots are limited and filling up quickly. Secure your spot today and be part of the future of manufacturing. hashtag#Webinar hashtag#AME hashtag#AI hashtag#Manufacturing hashtag#ProfessionalDevelopment hashtag#Networking hashtag#IndustryInsights hashtag#LearnAndGrow The Association for Manufacturing Excellence (AME) is a non-profit organization boasting over 4,000 members globally, spanning a diverse range of industries. Dedicated to promoting enterprise excellence, AME provides a robust platform for professionals to share best practices, network, and advance their careers through educational events and resources focused on continuous improvement and operational effectiveness.

21

Fascinating MBSE paper... However, I'm left with the interpretation that MBSE = Sysml... Are there other NDIA or similar publications that imply different? Trying to track down references on this topic so many thanks for sending over references or publications on real life implementation and application. This is a great survey work with many wonderful references and quotes: "Do not use Sysml for requirements handling" Sysml is based on UML" https://lnkd.in/ecWp_RZC

3

3 Comments

The question, how can you evaluate a systems engineer's performance effectively? To evaluate performance, it must be compared to the success criteria as defined in the Plan for embarking on the subject endeavor! For any task, either the micro or the macro, what are the intended values to be realized, what is the time limit for the deliverables, and what are the resources available to support the endeavor. System engineers should be involved with defining the Plan success criteria, this can result in buy in and can help set up working relationships for stakeholders involved. #pojectmanagement #scientists #construction #biologists #engineers #economists #manufacturing #economists #aerospaceengineering #owners #ceo #entrepreneurs #engineers #leadership

1

A terrific read on Boeing, but also on the costs of outsourcing manufacturing more broadly. It's also a story of institutions: We kind of tend to do things the way the system rewards us for. "The allures of this “capital light” approach were many: Troublesome unions, costly machine shops, and development budgets would all become someone else’s problem. Key financial metrics would instantly improve as costs shifted to other firms’ balance sheets. With its emphasis on less, the approach bore a superficial resemblance to lean production. But where lean production pushed know-how back onto the shop floor, this pushed the shop floor and its know-how out the door altogether." https://lnkd.in/dNsM_VMR

13

1 Comment

Advanced Power for Extreme Space Exploration! Consider submitting an abstract to this special session we are putting together at the AIAA SciTech 2025 Conference. Go to aiaa.org/SciTech to submit your abstract, and select “Other Topics in Aerospace Power Systems."

13

2 Comments

🚨Ever wondered what a 680-page book filled with systemic goodness looks like? Look no further! When reading Nancy Leveson's "An Introduction to System Safety Engineering" you will feel your brain expanding like a supernova 🌌. If you're into avoiding catastrophic failures in complex systems, this book is your new BFF. And hey, who doesn't love a little light reading on hazard analysis during a cozy weekend, right? 😂📚 #NerdLife #SystemSafety #CasualReading #EngineeringThrills

180

20 Comments

Understanding Support Reactions in 2D Force Systems [Crucial for correctly drawing your free-body diagrams (FBD)] When drawing a free-body diagram (FBD), it’s crucial to determine reactions at supports based on the physical constraints that resist motion. Here’s a guide to understanding this: Types of Motion and Corresponding Support Reactions Translation ↔️: If a support prevents translation in a given direction, a force develops in that direction. Rotation 🔄: If rotation is prevented, equal and opposite forces, separated by a perpendicular distance, create a moment. Types of 2D Supports 🛠️: 1. Normal Supports 2. Two-force Member Supports 3. Pin Supports 4. Contacting Rough Surface 5. Fixed Collar on Smooth Rod 6. Fixed Support Understanding these fundamental principles ensures accurate and reliable free-body diagrams, which are essential for analyzing and solving engineering problems effectively. Please feel free to share ♻️ if you find this useful, and comment below.

28

3 Comments