SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

Post by chris_wot » Sun, Nov 02, 2014, 4:15 AM UTC

marze wrote: post #283

chris_wot wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there are no inherently safe options, then that tends to preclude engineering in safety. I really don't think you know what you are talking about.

A propulsion system that was "inherently safe" wouldn't have dangerous failure modes. Although Virgin has tried in the past to paint their hybrid prolusion system as being "inherently safe", it isn't. No 60klb rocket engine is. To make any such system operate safely and reliably is a big engineering challenge. I think you don't understand the meaning of the term "inherently safe" in an engineering context.

Could you define it for me then?

Post by ceejayoz » Sun, Nov 02, 2014, 1:36 PM UTC

PavlovsCat wrote: post #309

ceejayoz wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect we're likely to solve greenhouse gas emissions long before we're able to get humans out of the solar system.

The one easy option, voluntary restraint, isn't even on the table , not that I noticed. So what makes you think that's so likely, what about our current priorities and behaviours makes you so optimistic? Where is the economic incentive to solve the problem? Sure, it means more long-term life and profit, but having even 1% less quarterly profit so that in 1000 years some other company can exist at all is not exactly h…

> So what makes you think that's so likely, what about our current priorities and behaviours makes you so optimistic?

I'm not enormously optimistic. I'm just saying that compared to interstellar travel, avoiding fossil fuels seems like a fairly small problem.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight