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

Artemis II Launch Day Updates

nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#891

Post by throwaway132448 »

partiallypro wrote: post #387

The politicization of everything and constant doomerish on here sure has echoes of early 2000s Slashdot. That's not a compliment. Reading the comments here is actually depressing. Human progress is never all at once, we can't even celebrate this triumph? Life is almost never "one or the other," the program could be scrapped to a junk yard and that wouldn't solve global hunger or global conflicts. Setting human eyes f…

In many ways I agree with you, but you have to acknowledge that things change when the _benefits_ of going forwards are funnelled to fewer and fewer people. That is what colors people’s view of what is happening in the way you are seeing.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#892

Post by gibolt »

coldtea wrote: post #861
JonChesterfield wrote: post #835

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who makes the bar for "good at delivering tech" if the guy pushing spacex, starlink and tesla simultaneously doesn't reach it?

Many promises that never materialized or resulted in mediocre or bad products, from the Mars mission to the Hyperloop, and from Teslas dismal software and often promised, never materializing fully autonomous drive to the Cybertruck. Let's not go into the robot vapourware either...

Hyperloop is the only thing you listed that is accurate, although it was only a whitepaper + competition. It was open for others to pursue.

Tesla easily has the best vehicle software + OTA and has since the S in 2012. It still feels better than most new vehicles.

You can buy a Tesla (including Cybertruck) today that will do 95+% of drives with 0 intervention. It may not be 100% autonomous yet, but there isn't anything obvious limiting the last step.

The robots exist but are still being developed. Within 5 years, it is hard to imagine them not becoming super valuable within factory settings.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#893

Post by functional_dev »

adamsb6 wrote: post #163
russdill wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, that's how these heat shields work. They aren't reusable, you can't test them and then use them again. Or do you mean the design? We already did Artemis I.

I mean the design. They've changed the AVCOAT to be less permeable and altered the re-entry profile. One of the findings of Artemis I is that lack of permeability led to trapped gas pockets which expanded and blew out pieces of heat shield. The reason for the change to be less permeable is to make it easier to perform ultrasonic testing, not to improve performance. They altered the re-entry profile on the theory that…

your point about gas pockets making the shield blow out made me curious

I found this visual schematic of the spalling helpful - https://vectree.io/c/the-physics-of-ablative-spalling-in-ori...

It finally makes sense why the gas needs to leak out... if it gets trapped behind the burnt outer crust, the pressure just blows pieces of the shield off like a tiny bomb

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#894

Post by wat10000 »

P-Nuts wrote: post #664
wat10000 wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say it's tested. It failed. Then they're flying it anyway. Wonderful stuff.

The heat shield on Artemis I didn’t fail in the sense that were there a crew they would have died

It failed testing. What you’re describing is the exact same thinking that destroyed Challenger. The O-rings are leaking, they’re not supposed to do that at all, but they’re not leaking enough to cause a failure....

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#895

Post by m_fayer »

XorNot wrote: post #471
m_fayer wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed it’s a tolerable vision, it could be worse. But it’s also a vision of humanity mostly living in enormous disenfranchised structural underclasses - corporate-authoritarianism in the asteroids and subsistence-UBI for all those unnecessary humans on Earth. It’s a vision of incredible technological progress without any growth in our ability to justly and humanely govern ourselves or move past violent conflict. I a…

I don't know that there was a lot wrong with Earth under the Expanse though. The problems there were kind of organic: they just didn't need that many people, but they did have UBI, but even if you wanted to better yourself and were exceptional at your job... You could still be 50,001 in the queue of the 50,000 they needed. Earth in the expanse desperately needed places to expand too and send people, but the solar sys…

One of the reasons I love the Expanse so much is how deftly it wove subtle economic and resource dynamics into the plot, while also integrating so many other themes, genres, and styles.

I agree with your analysis of the cause of Earth's troubles, though I'm not sure that adds up to not much being wrong with it. The Earth in the Expanse never figured out how to deal with "excess humans" and the result was planet-Baltimore, that seems pretty wrong to me. And I don't think it's too soon for us to be taking a hard look at how this is likely to work out on the real Earth.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#896

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #736
kortilla wrote: post #731

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a significant challenge compared to what they’ve already done. Each of those previous tests could have easily gone to LEO running the engines just a tiny bit longer. OPs point is that they intentionally didn’t. achieving LEO means you need a relight to have a controlled reentry. You don’t want that if you want to avoid countries being mad at you while you iron out those controls

> It’s not a significant challenge compared to what they’ve already done I don't know an aersospace engineer, within SpaceX or without, who would agree. When you increase speeds you increase energies faster. That has an effect on everything from pump performance to re-entry physics. > Each of those previous tests could have easily gone to LEO running the engines just a tiny bit longer Which risks recovery. Given they…

It is like a runway taxi test on a plane that is fully capable of flight. Sometimes the plane takes off unexpectedly but the plan is not to do it. Starship can do orbital insertion now despite no plan to do it yet.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#897

Post by TeMPOraL »

jacquesm wrote: post #694
anon291 wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crazy to believe that people who believe in one holy book are killing people over another holy book in countries like (but certainly not limited to) Nigeria, while another country launches people to the moon. But, alas, I agree with you. There's no way out but through I guess.

That other country has also people killing other people over a holy book.

That this dissonance hurts, already tells you why space is important.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#898

Post by nancyminusone »

prohobo wrote: post #821
jojobas wrote: post #802

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But they’re ridiculously good at not persisting with stupid. They are persisting with HLS though.

Ughhh, Elon Moosk amirite? Such a fraud, because [???] I don't really understand why these kinds of comments persist except as some pathological cope when confronted with a world that doesn't work the way you want it to. It's not convincing, it immediately outs you as a zealot, it's counterproductive in every single way. Why keep doing it?

He's a much bigger asshole than he is a fraud, but he is a fraud too. There's no hype like Musk hype.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#899

Post by lentil_soup »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #597
GaryBluto wrote: post #450

It is very disconcerting to see so many completely disregarding incredible technological innovation because other problems exist, especially on HN. If we were not allowed to progress technology until everybody is 100% free of suffering, we'd never be able to create technological that may potentially lead to the alleviation of suffering. It all feels very crabs in a bucket - "I don't feel happy so nobody else should,…

How dare we want to fix the existential threats on the planet before we spend billions on a publicity stunt. No, there's no possible way we "save humanity" with space exploration. The whole "eggs in more than one basket" thing is insane. The resources required to establish a colony, get it self-sufficient, then able to grow, and then put enough people on it will take half a century and the planet is burning up today…

why pick on space exploration which has such a small budget and provides with a lot of hard science, technology, boosts the economy, etc and not pick on many other things we do that make no sense? why not pick on the military? or fossil fuel subsidies? or the entertainment/sports industry? or ads? why not pick on bureaucracy or war or billionaires? ... all of those have way bigger budgets and ain't fixing any "existential threats", arguably making them worse

It's so easy to pick on the few remaining industries and science that invest on a future that is not the next quarter and doesn't just make the same people richer. Make no mistake, the little money spent on space exploration (or science in general) is not what's causing or keeping us from solving existential threats.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#900

Post by specialist »

prohobo wrote: post #821
jojobas wrote: post #802

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But they’re ridiculously good at not persisting with stupid. They are persisting with HLS though.

Ughhh, Elon Moosk amirite? Such a fraud, because [???] I don't really understand why these kinds of comments persist except as some pathological cope when confronted with a world that doesn't work the way you want it to. It's not convincing, it immediately outs you as a zealot, it's counterproductive in every single way. Why keep doing it?

> confronted with a world that doesn't work the way you want it to

Sure.

Some of us are just trying to figure out the new rules. What is all this hypercapitalism stuff (aka Muskism) and who are the people (lunatics) pushing us there?

So it's natural to kibitz about one of the most powerful people on the planet. Especially when he's also a world-striding shit poster, antagonizing everyone, demanding a response.

FWIW: the writings of Jill Lepore, Quinn Slobobian, and Ben Tarnoff have been most illuminating. Ditto their misc guest appearances on various podcasts.

X Man: The Elon Musk Origin Story

https://www.pushkin.fm/podcasts/elon-musk-the-evening-rocket

Elon Musk Is Building a Sci-Fi World, and the Rest of Us Are Trapped in It Nov. 4, 2021

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/opinion/elon-musk-capital...

Muskism: Guide for the Perplexed

https://www.amazon.com/Muskism-Guide-Perplexed-Quinn-Slobodi...

https://bookshop.org/p/books/muskism-a-guide-for-the-perplex...

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2026/mar/26/muskism-by-qui...

https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/books/muskism-review-elon...

Post reply on HN