Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

arstechnica.com

301–310 of 421 posts

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Nuclear fusion is a more likely answer to spaceflight and Earth's clean energy problem. Considering we don't even have fission rockets or airplanes in normal use, making a fusion powerplant that is light enough to get off the ground seems very far fetched. Even if we eventually use fusion for travel beyond earth orbit, I'd bet chemical rockets would still be in use. Don't we already have thrusters that are useful in…

For those interested: As absurd as it sounds nuclear powered aircraft engines are a thing.[1] They have also been proposed for spacecraft, Scott Manley does a great video talking about nuclear rocket engines[2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvZjhWE-3zM

I flirted with the idea of using supersized nuclear powered aircraft as the terrestrial version of the Aldrin cycler[1] concept. Basically, these things would be designed to never land but instead run in circular paths between continents with a fleet of onboard craft and hangers that will exchange cargo and passengers instead. They will be designed from the ground up to be maintanable and refuelable under constant operation (not a particularly difficult goal for a nuclear powered craft).

Safety is a very valid concern for any supersized airborne vehicle but especially a nuclear powered one! However, this is one department where scale in itself brings it's own benefits. The volume increases faster than the surface area so you could have a hull far thicker than that of many naval ships while still having a truly vast interior volume. Not needing to ever land also reduces avenues for sabatoge and presumably the craft's interior itself would be heavily compartmentalized. You can also optimise your hull to deal with a narrow air pressure range which you cannot do with normal craft which need to be able to handle a wide range from ground level to the stratospheric.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_cycler

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The letter appears to be criticizing a different document: The California Mathematics Framework. That framework appears to be around a thousand pages, which I don't have time to read right now, unfortunately. It is strange that you think that letter would change my opinion though. It doesn't really contain any analysis or arguments. It just says that the changes are bad, and here is a long list of people that agree.…

Respectfully, the onus is on you to understand what are the perils of such policies that erode the future of our kids, for those that oppose such policies are respected leaders in Mathematics education - perhaps you should question your stance based on what apparently is a marketing pamphelt precisely designed to pursuade people. Based on what you said i.e. "90% of what they recommend looks like really good ways to i…

Respectfully, I'm having a hard time following your point.

Originally, you linked to a pamphlet and implied that the authors of the pamphlet were "actively undermining the American spirit". I pointed out that the packet appeared to provide good advice for math instruction. You responded "perhaps you should question your stance based on what apparently is a marketing pamphlet precisely designed to persuade people". Why did you link to it then?

What information are you pointing me to that would "convince [me] otherwise"? I read the letter you linked to, and it provides no arguments. As I said previously, it is mostly a list of names of people who are publicly stating their disagreement with a different document - literally appeal to authority fallacy.

I think you would be surprised how much we are aligned on the importance of math education. I'm an engineer from a family of engineers. I clicked your link because I have a son starting kindergarten in a California public school in two and a half weeks. But I was pleasantly surprised to see that the math education being advocated appeared better than the one I received, not worse.

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Russians did a much better job in recent decades The multiple problems with Nauka suggest they've lost their edge and never learned the lessons from docking issues with Progress in the past.

What is Russia good at these days other than illegal industries like hacking? Their extraordinary level of corruption is leading to their demise.

Reliable, cost-effective main battle tanks, missile systems, and submarines. Consumer/commercial products? Ummm......I don't know of any either.

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#304

How so many educated, intelligent people seem to think that we (as a species, or even as Americans) are so resource-poor that “space exploration” and “improving the earth” yield an either/or decision absolutely mystifies me. You want to free up resources for either one? Start with global military spending and the financial sector. Both have their place and both have grown far beyond it.

Look at the numbers. SpaceX is doing it’s thing for a few billion a year. That’s chump change compared to the money being spent on, let’s say professional basketball. Not picking on basketball it’s my favorite spectator sport. But saying, if you want to find something less worthy than “improving the earth”, you have about a hundred better targets than space exploration.

> SpaceX is doing it’s thing for a few billion a year

One can project from SpaceX's launch history that as the commercialization of space intensifies, this figure is going to continue to grow exponentially

https://www.spacexstats.xyz/#launchhistory-per-year

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully, the onus is on you to understand what are the perils of such policies that erode the future of our kids, for those that oppose such policies are respected leaders in Mathematics education - perhaps you should question your stance based on what apparently is a marketing pamphelt precisely designed to pursuade people. Based on what you said i.e. "90% of what they recommend looks like really good ways to i…

Respectfully, I'm having a hard time following your point. Originally, you linked to a pamphlet and implied that the authors of the pamphlet were "actively undermining the American spirit". I pointed out that the packet appeared to provide good advice for math instruction. You responded "perhaps you should question your stance based on what apparently is a marketing pamphlet precisely designed to persuade people". Wh…

> Why did you link to it then?

It's important to show what the marketing material is - verbatim - and what kind of BS is being peddled by these people. Apparently, you didn't find it BS so I asked you to read up on it.

I am not following your logic in this entire argument chain. Let's move on.

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> SpaceX didn't invent rocket engines They kind of did invent full-flow engines though, which were an unattained holy grail of rocketry.

Just ... No. Read the history. At least read Wikipedia. "Staged combustion (Замкнутая схема) was first proposed by Alexey Isaev in 1949. The first staged combustion engine was the S1.5400 (11D33) used in the Soviet planetary rocket, designed by Melnikov, a former assistant to Isaev.[1] About the same time (1959), Nikolai Kuznetsov began work on the closed cycle engine NK-9 for Korolev's orbital ICBM, GR-1. Kuznetsov…

He said "full-flow engines". None of those that you cited were full-flow.

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting to even fathom that someone would put cultural domain issues entirely within a capitalist context. There are two fundamental reasons that content everywhere is subsidized and protected. They are of course related. First, more obviously is the cultural aspect. The things we believe, the stories we tell, are part of our identities. With critical mass and investment those stories some will take root. It…

> Once you add in language and cultural barriers, i.e. the fact that a movie about 'Captain America' will have a strong enough audience domestically, with some acceptance abroad, and you have insurmountable competitive advantage. (Nobody is going to watch a film about 'Captain France', or 'Captain Japan' - or rather, many fewer). That explains why Parasite and Money Heist flopped. > The new Dune film is Denis Villneu…

"That explains why Parasite and Money Heist flopped."

It explains why thousands of films, just like 'Parasite' and 'Money Heist' flop, why they are not on Netflix or in theatres, and why you've never heard of them, and why neither Spain nor S. Korea are entertainment powerhouses in film.

KPop however, which is definitely a Korean export, has some strong 'industrial foundations' along the lines of what I'm talking about. It's a real industry there.

Here are 2021 'Canadian Films' - have a gander and see how many you recognize. [1]

Quebec consumes it's own content because they are a distinct from the rest of North America, and they invest a lot in culture. And a pretty good comparative basis for Ontario / Rest of Canada.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_films_of_2021

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using these resources to improve chemical flamethrowers is sub-optimal. A dead end. Nuclear fusion is a more likely answer to spaceflight and Earth's clean energy problem. It likely should be the priority.

>Nuclear fusion is a more likely answer to spaceflight and Earth's clean energy problem. Considering we don't even have fission rockets or airplanes in normal use, making a fusion powerplant that is light enough to get off the ground seems very far fetched. Even if we eventually use fusion for travel beyond earth orbit, I'd bet chemical rockets would still be in use. Don't we already have thrusters that are useful in…

DFDs seem promising, but are far from producing 1G of thrust.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Fusion_Drive

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hydrazine is highly toxic and Crew Dragon uses a derivative of it.

Neither Crew Dragon, or Hydrazine, is on the rocket in question...

So the FAA should hand off regulation of one particular rocket to a different agency because it is not dangerous to the public in one particular aspect? What if they decide to use hydrazine in the maneuvering thrusters? Then it should be handed back?
Post reply on HN