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

Commercial lunar lander presumed lost after moon landing attempt

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 190 posts

Re: Commercial lunar lander presumed lost after moon landing attempt

#151

Post by krisoft »

FredPret wrote: post #135
krisoft wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> mining base station What would you be mining on the moon and what for?

Rmemeber that whatever you mine up there is valuable because of the position further out of our gravity well, not just because of mineral content

Okay, but that asks the same question: What do you want to use the stuff for?

Imagine that I told you that I have a new venture to mine slate in the arctic. And when asked I would tell you that it is very expensive to transport slate from the already existing mines to the arctic, which makes the arctic mined slate that much more valuable. You would immediately see that this is true, as long as there is someone who wants slate in the arctic, and very much not true if there is nobody there who needs pretty roofs or blackboards.

Somehow with space this is less obvious?

Re: Commercial lunar lander presumed lost after moon landing attempt

#152

Post by ihatepython »

belter wrote: post #8
noisy_boy wrote: post #6

Beautiful images of Earth from the lander: https://twitter.com/ispace_inc/status/1650506233575604227/ph... and https://twitter.com/ispace_inc/status/1649707714447306753/ph...

If you look carefully at Earth, as the image was taken during the eclipse, you see the shadow of the Moon on Earth.

Actually I think that was just a speck of dust on the camera lens.

Re: Commercial lunar lander presumed lost after moon landing attempt

#153

Post by Gordonjcp »

dieselgate wrote: post #139
speedgoose wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess an engineer should handle a imperial screw but deciding to use imperial units to exchange data in a software project seems so wrong.

Im American but have heard it’s common for 2-by imperial lumber units be used in Canada and uk for example. But metric would be used for cuts (which i think is easier often too)

Many years ago, probably about 40 years or so, I remember my dad pointing out plasterboard in the building supplies store that was marked as 1200mm x 8'6", because standard UK ceilings are 8'6" but everything else (kitchen units and appliances for example) are in multiples of 600mm...

Re: Commercial lunar lander presumed lost after moon landing attempt

#154

Post by FredPret »

krisoft wrote: post #151
FredPret wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rmemeber that whatever you mine up there is valuable because of the position further out of our gravity well, not just because of mineral content

Okay, but that asks the same question: What do you want to use the stuff for? Imagine that I told you that I have a new venture to mine slate in the arctic. And when asked I would tell you that it is very expensive to transport slate from the already existing mines to the arctic, which makes the arctic mined slate that much more valuable. You would immediately see that this is true, as long as there is someone who wa…

You can't build anything useful or fun with slate in the arctic.

But you can set up low/zero g manufacturing on/near the moon, military installations, incredible observatories, and unique tourist facilities.

You can also set up space habs / moon bases for people to live in in the far future which would spread our bets as a species in a way that living in the arctic doesn't.

Re: Commercial lunar lander presumed lost after moon landing attempt

#155

Post by EasyTiger_ »

danielodievich wrote: post #72

I am currently reading the gorgeous Folio Society edition of the A Man on the Moon The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts by Andrew Chaikin (worth a buy from https://www.foliosociety.com/usa/a-man-on-the-moon.html if you a) like the topic and b) have 235.00). I just finished the book 1 which ends with well known Apollo 13 disaster and the RCA of the explosion is that the liquid O2 tank for the fuel cell was intended fo…

[flagged]

Re: Commercial lunar lander presumed lost after moon landing attempt

#156

Post by sjcsjc »

ihatepython wrote: post #152
belter wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look carefully at Earth, as the image was taken during the eclipse, you see the shadow of the Moon on Earth.

Actually I think that was just a speck of dust on the camera lens.

Not sure if you're taking the piss there or not, but assuming not, they explicitly said on their webcast that it was an eclipse.

Re: Commercial lunar lander presumed lost after moon landing attempt

#157

Post by Gordonjcp »

somenameforme wrote: post #137
VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #12

Is there an actual commercial reason for landing on the moon? What was this lander going to do? It seems like a lot of missions from various companies and countries are trying to get to the moon and they're all crashing. Is it just a rite of passage for a space program? What is the point of this

The big reason not much happened in space in the past was cost. The Space Shuttle ended up costing around $60,000/kg to send stuff to space. SpaceX brought that down to $2,600/kg with the Falcon 9. And if Starship lives up to its potential, you're looking at $10/kg. You literally cannot overstate the impact of that change. Space flights costs will start to become completely viable for small companies or even individu…

> Space flights costs will start to become completely viable for small companies or even individuals.

We're already at a point where - at least using companies in the UK - it costs about the same to launch a cubesat as it does to buy a poverty-spec cloth-seats-no-aircon Ford Focus.

It's mad that I could launch a 10cm 1kg cubesat - think in terms of a bag of sugar - for so little money, and all I need to do is ring a guy a couple of hour's drive south in Glasgow and wave a credit card to do it.

Re: Commercial lunar lander presumed lost after moon landing attempt

#158

Post by bregma »

Firmwarrior wrote: post #84
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I do not understand people who would jump at the chance to live on a permanent Martian or Lunar colony.

I dunno if I'd jump at the chance, but I'd probably go there for work once things kick into high gear and all the money is out there

And all the science I don't understand. It's just my job five days a week. A rocket man.

Re: Commercial lunar lander presumed lost after moon landing attempt

#159

Post by bregma »

dieselgate wrote: post #139
speedgoose wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess an engineer should handle a imperial screw but deciding to use imperial units to exchange data in a software project seems so wrong.

Im American but have heard it’s common for 2-by imperial lumber units be used in Canada and uk for example. But metric would be used for cuts (which i think is easier often too)

Given a 2x4 is 1.75 by 3.75 inches, it sure doesn't make using Imperial measure any easier than metric. It's more that certain demographics are oppositional-defiant when it comes to change and they tend to make up the "base" of a powerful political parry.

Re: Commercial lunar lander presumed lost after moon landing attempt

#160

Post by moffkalast »

ghaff wrote: post #54
speedgoose wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Foot pound second is such a weird unit. How did that pass the quality controls? I also don’t understand how one team of educated engineers could decide to use imperial units instead of metric units.

As a former mechanical engineer, any calculations involving pounds in any form I pretty much always converted to metric and then back at the end if need-be. The trinity of pound-mass, pound-force, and slugs is incredibly easy to screw up--at least as a student.

Smh, Americans will literally convert into metric and back to keep using their bald eagles per shotgun squared units.
Post reply on HN