Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX SN9 Explodes on Landing

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 317 posts

Re: SpaceX SN9 Explodes on Landing

#281

Post by alentist »

Layke1123 wrote: post #274
sudosysgen wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did not have a wonderful society. It was very deficient in many ways. I didn't argue that point because we agree. The point I'm arguing is whether or not the USSR could have had a better society if it wasn't for US and other foreign intervention, and the answer is an unequivocal yes.

Exactly! They can't even consider the possibility it seems because they don't want to even consider it. Its almost as entrenched as what some might call faith that the US was superior to the USSR and if you even suggest the idea of anything else you are downvoted because you are the bad guy for even considering it.

GP: They did not have a wonderful society. It was very deficient in many ways. I didn't argue that point because we agree.

You: Exactly!

Glad you also agree with my comments, then.

Re: SpaceX SN9 Explodes on Landing

#282

Post by alentist »

Layke1123 wrote: post #273
Cogito wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is moving the goalposts. It's possible that the USSR would have been a better system, had the cold war not happened, but that's not the world we live in. If you want to make that argument you have to explain why it's reasonable to excuse how the USSR turned out in reality, and why in your hypothetical world it would have turned out differently. With respect to space advancement, I suspect the main reason for sus…

It's not moving to goalposts to acknowledge that the USSR beat us to space and that a large part of their collapse was due directly to the influence of the US.

On the contrary: It was Western technology and capital that propped up the USSR despite its repeated failures and inefficiencies.

https://capx.co/soviet-communism-was-dependent-on-western-te...

Re: SpaceX SN9 Explodes on Landing

#283

Post by naikrovek »

sudosysgen wrote: post #278
naikrovek wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, so which mistakes is SpaceX making that NASA also made?

Failing to restart an engine in a retrograde trajectory. A difficult task that both the Soviets and NASA (and Arianespace and the Chinese) had issues with, but worked out. It's very difficult because of the turbulent airflow in an engine bell pointed against the airspeed vector. Despite this, many rocket engines can do it reliably.

> Failing to restart an engine in a retrograde trajectory

That's not a failure, that's the effect of some upstream failure.

What failure are they repeating? Pumps sized too small? Improper torquing? You talk like you know the details, so share them.

Re: SpaceX SN9 Explodes on Landing

#284

Post by kelnos »

GizmoSwan wrote: post #218
nickik wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are so confident in your opinion and you are so incredibly wrong. Pretty much every NASA engineer that has worked with SpaceX has been incredibly impressed by their methods. Literally every single one of their competitors, including nation states have started to change their who launch strategy because they saw no other way to compete with Spacex (and they are still failing) all of them have expressed how impress…

I just want to know how you know that "you" are incredibly right in this. You are just speculating like everybody else here. There is no quality or quantitative measurement available here for you to make these absolute statements. The only thing that I can gather from your text is that a lot can go wrong in fact. Having the prototype that is exploding is NOT fine at this stage and that is "my" opinion. Your opinion i…

> I just want to know how you know that "you" are incredibly right in this. You are just speculating like everybody else here.

Sure, and the same goes for you. Empirically, though, we know that when the US/NASA throws a ton of money at something and has a good engineering culture, we can get brilliant things like Apollo. When that culture erodes and the appetite for burning cash fades, we get things like the Space Shuttle. Yes, amazing, but mediocre when compared to the achievements of the Apollo program, and ultimately ending in failure and decommissioning.

Empirically, we have SpaceX, which has basically invented the "reusable rocket" category, using a hybrid development method that includes simulations and building and testing prototypes early and often.

Empirically, we (still) have Boeing, which has stuck with the old model, overengineering from the start. What do we have? A development process that is years behind SpaceX's, for a lot more money.

Learning from failure is fine when the only cost is money and materials. SpaceX's progress so far seems to have proven their development model, even before Starship.

I do find it really funny that you start out by deriding everyone for just speculating, but then finish your post loudly denouncing everyone who supports SpaceX as some sort of idiot... which is exactly the same sort of speculation... speculation which is not supported by the facts on the ground.

Re: SpaceX SN9 Explodes on Landing

#285

Post by sudosysgen »

alentist wrote: post #281
Layke1123 wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly! They can't even consider the possibility it seems because they don't want to even consider it. Its almost as entrenched as what some might call faith that the US was superior to the USSR and if you even suggest the idea of anything else you are downvoted because you are the bad guy for even considering it.

GP: They did not have a wonderful society. It was very deficient in many ways. I didn't argue that point because we agree. You: Exactly! Glad you also agree with my comments, then.

You're the one that replied to

>The USSR, had it not had to fight a cold war against the US, could very well have been a much better system not just for space flight, but for a way to structure and run society in general.

thus implying disagreements. Since neither of us have contradicted such a statement, either you've been replying hors-sujet or you were just trying to show agreement, right?

Re: SpaceX SN9 Explodes on Landing

#286

Post by gridspy »

ctdonath wrote: post #261
GizmoSwan wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so?

Pedantic trolling noted; I’ll engage just to hone my thoughts. Every production rocket is fully expendable. Launch, expect discard of 100%* of launch system. Starship is designed for 100% reusable, with same-day fly/land/refuel/repeat. That’s obviously a huge difference. * - exceptions: Space Shuttle discarded most of the launch system, acting as glider to return crew/cargo and some engines. Reuse turnaround was mont…

All true.

Also, the only company doing propulsive landings of 10 storey tall rockets is SpaceX.

I'm looking forward to seeing the landing structure that is going to catch the booster using the grid fins at the launch site.

Re: SpaceX SN9 Explodes on Landing

#287

Post by Layke1123 »

alentist wrote: post #280
Layke1123 wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why did the US have to systemically mass murder Native Americans and enslave Africans Americans and fight over seas wars in Vietnam and North Korea? If you can assert their atrocities, I can so also assert the US's. You are dodging, not me.

You again keep trying to dodge the question and change the subject, so I'll ask it yet again: If the USSR had such a wonderful society, why did they have to systematically mass murder ordinary people who wanted to leave this wonderful society ? If you're saying that slavery is also abhorrent and evil—like the slavery and mass murder that takes place under Communism—then we're in agreement. Now, can you please answer…

So you agree, capitalism has been responsible for slavery and mass murder?

Re: SpaceX SN9 Explodes on Landing

#288

Post by Layke1123 »

alentist wrote: post #281
Layke1123 wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly! They can't even consider the possibility it seems because they don't want to even consider it. Its almost as entrenched as what some might call faith that the US was superior to the USSR and if you even suggest the idea of anything else you are downvoted because you are the bad guy for even considering it.

GP: They did not have a wonderful society. It was very deficient in many ways. I didn't argue that point because we agree. You: Exactly! Glad you also agree with my comments, then.

Lol we didn't agree mate but way to try and take a quick win by "selectively" ignoring the parts you don't want to quote.

Re: SpaceX SN9 Explodes on Landing

#289

Post by alentist »

Layke1123 wrote: post #287
alentist wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You again keep trying to dodge the question and change the subject, so I'll ask it yet again: If the USSR had such a wonderful society, why did they have to systematically mass murder ordinary people who wanted to leave this wonderful society ? If you're saying that slavery is also abhorrent and evil—like the slavery and mass murder that takes place under Communism—then we're in agreement. Now, can you please answer…

So you agree, capitalism has been responsible for slavery and mass murder?

Not at all. That's nonsense. Now, can you please answer the question you keep dodging?

If the USSR had such a wonderful society, why did they have to systematically mass murder ordinary people who wanted to leave this wonderful society?

Re: SpaceX SN9 Explodes on Landing

#290

Post by alentist »

Layke1123 wrote: post #288
alentist wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP: They did not have a wonderful society. It was very deficient in many ways. I didn't argue that point because we agree. You: Exactly! Glad you also agree with my comments, then.

Lol we didn't agree mate but way to try and take a quick win by "selectively" ignoring the parts you don't want to quote.

> Lol we didn't agree mate

Your comment says otherwise.

Post reply on HN