51–60 of 203 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
didn't the NASA have a rocket doing these type of manoeuvres multiple times a day? in like the early 90's?
That sounds pretty neat; I'd love to read more about it if you recall the name.
NASA would have spent 2 trillion and 50 years to get to this stage. SpaceX's rapid iterations and fail fast methodology might save the human species
The ceramics teacher announced on opening day that he was dividing the class into two groups. All those on the left side of the studio, he said, would be graded solely on the quantity of work they produced, all those on the right solely on its quality.
His procedure was simple: on the final day of class he would bring in his bathroom scales and weigh the work of the “quantity” group: fifty pound of pots rated an “A”, forty pounds a “B”, and so on. Those being graded on “quality”, however, needed to produce only one pot – albeit a perfect one – to get an “A”.
Well, came grading time and a curious fact emerged: the works of highest quality were all produced by the group being graded for quantity. It seems that while the “quantity” group was busily churning out piles of work – and learning from their mistakes – the “quality” group had sat theorizing about perfection, and in the end had little more to show for their efforts than grandiose theories and a pile of dead clay.
EDIT: This is taken from an article about fear while making art. I think that's what's happening here - The SLS team are probably not allowed to blow up their space ship (because it is too expensive). SpaceX are allowed to blow theirs up, and in doing so they can learn a lot more a lot more quickly, and try more daring things to begin with.
It did land, then exploded right now. There was a fire at the base of the SN10 and apparently got to the tank after a few minutes. 99% success. Next time for 100% hopefully.
It just blew up! Landing legs didn't deploy so it landed on its body, and fire suppression kicked in, but I guess there was a leak.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He's doing a lot of important things. He's a pretty lousy man, in my opinion.
How is he lousy?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. They need 1 to land - more than one means too much thrust. Last time they only lit one, it failed to light, and boom. This time they lit all three hoping at least one would work, then turned off the ones they didn’t need. I assume they had the idea independently of the guy who asked musk why they didn’t light more than one and shut down — musk replied “because we’re dumb”, but I guess that tweeter could claim to…
Quick edit to this - they need two for the rotation to happen. Last time they lit two and one failed, so they did not have enough thrust to rotate it. This time they lit three and turned off one for the rotation, then turned off a second once it was rotated.
SpaceX seems to have mastered the belly flop. Landing is getting there.
didn't the NASA have a rocket doing these type of manoeuvres multiple times a day? in like the early 90's?
Starship has flaps, a low terminal velocity belly flop maneuver, and then a rotation up to landing only a few hundred meters up. They definitely build on each other, but this is more impressive.
NASA would have spent 2 trillion and 50 years to get to this stage. SpaceX's rapid iterations and fail fast methodology might save the human species
NASA would have spent 2 trillion and 50 years to get to this stage. SpaceX's rapid iterations and fail fast methodology might save the human species
Would you mind elaborating here?
How will reaching a dead planet while we actively kill the literally perfect place for us to survive and foster save the human species, exactly? And how does a fail fast methodology fit in there?