171–180 of 190 posts
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.
We can’t stay here forever. This planet is 4.5 billion years old and has 1 billion years left. That’s assuming that our species will be able to survive so long.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But is it odd? It is just a very hard problem. You need to spend a lot of resources to get it right and you need to spend them in the right way. Also you need to build up to the capability step by step. You can't drum random engineers together and expect them to build a lunar lander. You need to give them progressively harder and harder challenges, and see if they develop the right chops to handle them. What do you w…
It is indeed odd to me, that the only and all three missions distinct by funding all failed in exactly the same way, at exactly the same point, where those funded from a different source only did 1 in 25 times in that way. Perhaps the randomly-drummed up engineers argument could have some merit for overall mission failure, though it doesn't adequately explain failure on only the same, final mode. Were the same engine…
These are groups on a shoestring budget trying to do something very hard for the first time. They fail at the hardest part of the task. How about that as an explanation?
> All reasonable explanations have to be a bit out there,
Have you tried hard things before? Failure is the default outcome.
> they all stopped transmitting on the final leg
That tends to happen when you hit a rock the size of the Moon. As these did.
I think you are making a mystery out of this where there is none.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is indeed odd to me, that the only and all three missions distinct by funding all failed in exactly the same way, at exactly the same point, where those funded from a different source only did 1 in 25 times in that way. Perhaps the randomly-drummed up engineers argument could have some merit for overall mission failure, though it doesn't adequately explain failure on only the same, final mode. Were the same engine…
> I've no plausible theory why, that's why it's interesting. These are groups on a shoestring budget trying to do something very hard for the first time. They fail at the hardest part of the task. How about that as an explanation? > All reasonable explanations have to be a bit out there, Have you tried hard things before? Failure is the default outcome. > they all stopped transmitting on the final leg That tends to h…
Indeed, it's an assumption they didn't land and instead impacted, until confirmed visually - as the landing is typically an automated process at that point.
Continually breezing past the points I've made does nothing to convince me this isn't odd or interesting. I've no horse in the race and will continue to be intrigued until someone can give better explanations, rather than "it's hard dude".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A slug is defined as the mass that is accelerated by 1 ft/s2 when a net force of one pound (lbf) is exerted on it.[2] One slug is a mass equal to 32.1740 lb this is like if you tried to explain the difference between a newton and a kilogram to an alien an they didn't quite get it
It's not that complicated. A slug is the Imperial unit of mass, like the kilogram. It's just that while in metric the unit of mass is primary and the unit of force (Newton) is derived, in foot-pound-second it is the reverse. Pounds is a fundamental unit of force and the slug is derived.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not that complicated. A slug is the Imperial unit of mass, like the kilogram. It's just that while in metric the unit of mass is primary and the unit of force (Newton) is derived, in foot-pound-second it is the reverse. Pounds is a fundamental unit of force and the slug is derived.
Pound force is the unit for force. Pound mass is the unit for mass. Colloquially people say pound.for both of them
Not universally. We still talked about a rocket’s “pounds of thrust.” But for things like angular momentum, center of gravity, etc. those were usually calculated with slugs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're a private company looking to build a mining base station, tourist hotel, or any other thing a private company might want to do, then it's best to get the kinks worked out by practicing with an unmanned lander a few times first
> mining base station What would you be mining on the moon and what for?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
It's already cheaper to fly between UK cities via Barcelona than to take the train; in ten years time it'll be cheaper to go from London to Edinburgh via the L2 Lagrange point.
It costs £40 per person to travel from Glasgow to Dundee even booking in advance, making it slightly more expensive for one journey for one person than the cheapest car I've ever bought - and roughly the same price as a tank of LPG in my old Range Rover.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because everyone assumes they'd be an explorer or visionary scientist when they'd most likely just be taking out the trash in a frozen desert.
I don't think non-explorers really understand explorers. There were other people on Captain Cook's voyage and other people on Columbus's. Taking a shot at long odds is about knowing that you may fail. Lorisks want certainty and knowledge that they may not fail. Hirisks hope for uncertainty and the chance that they may succeed wildly. It is built in to a Hirisk's belief system that they may fail. But while a Lorisk mi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I've no plausible theory why, that's why it's interesting. These are groups on a shoestring budget trying to do something very hard for the first time. They fail at the hardest part of the task. How about that as an explanation? > All reasonable explanations have to be a bit out there, Have you tried hard things before? Failure is the default outcome. > they all stopped transmitting on the final leg That tends to h…
They didn't lose contact on impact, but minutes prior. The hardest part is the landing, not necessarily specifically the communicating with the lander on the way down - which in some sense is trivial depending how it's done. Indeed, it's an assumption they didn't land and instead impacted, until confirmed visually - as the landing is typically an automated process at that point. Continually breezing past the points I…
I’m sorry that it feels like that to you. I’m doing my best to adress your points to the best of my abilities. If you feel I am breezing by your point that just means I haven’t understood you yet.
> They didn't lose contact on impact, but minutes prior.
I see what you are saying, but that is not true.
The Hakuto-R Mission 1 reports they have telemetry about the craft free falling. They talk about an altitude measurement system possibly miscalculating. They also talk about the thruster running out of fuel. [1]
The Beresheet had an Innertial Measurement Unit fail, then they had communication issues, and they regained communication, but by that time it was too late to save the lander. They also had telemetry up until the impact if I read it right. [2]
Which one is the third you are refering to?
1: https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/japans-ispace-prepa...