Racescort666

Members
  • Content count

    295
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

229 Excellent

1 Follower

About Racescort666

  1. Recovering upper stages - in orbit?

    Essentially ACES is supposed to be like this, i.e. still usable after payload deployment. ULA has talked about adding the ability to refuel ACES on orbit but I think the biggest advantage that ACES would have is a more reliable disposal burn. ULA has also mentioned a 1 up/1 down launch strategy that a long duration upper stage like ACES would be able to help accomplish. For GTO, everything is in a very similar orbit so it's not too big of a stretch to do something like this.
  2. NASA SLS/Orion/DSG/DST

    Is this the same thread that said there's nothing of value in TLI launches? All of these things are starting to blend together. Regardless, ACES is a long duration bigger version of Centaur and ULA makes it sound like it's specifically for TLI and other beyond earth orbit missions. I guess there's no reason it couldn't be used on shorter duration missions since IVF is really what gives it the capability for long duration. Plus IVF is a cost reduction and big complexity reduction from current Centaur systems.
  3. Apollo CM Dimensions

    I'm an American too. Working in the auto industry converted me to metric. KSP reinforced it.
  4. Liquid rocket dev.

    Do you mean nitrogen dioxide (NO2) or nitrous oxide (N2O)? Nitrous oxide is common as an oxidizer while nitrogen dioxide is usually considered a pollutant but is also present in RFNA.
  5. SpaceX Discussion Thread

    I thought part of the drive for FH was for the 6t+ payloads going to GTO to have a chance at reusability. I was under the impression that the weight limit to GTO for reusable was less than 6t (according to wikipedia it is 5.5t). With the introduction of FH, there is now an increased mass to GTO while recovering the boosters.
  6. SpaceX Discussion Thread

    I was going to ask how you figured that there was only 1 launch until FH. By my count, there's at least 3.
  7. Apollo CM Dimensions

    3.8 ft and 2.67 ft That's just a ballpark from scaling the dimensions though. eg. X/10ft 7in = 2.28in/6.35in, solve for X = 3.8.
  8. Why do they not fair engines nozzles?

    I was going to say something about ballistic coefficient and boat-tail ammunition but then I came across this picture. Bullets have an interesting trade off between fitting in the cartridge, fitting in the gun (magazine), fitting in the barrel (on the rifling and sealing the bore), and aerodynamics.
  9. The Racing Thread

    I love endurance racing. One of my favorite things to do is play KSP and have one of the big 12 or 24 hour races on.
  10. SpaceX Discussion Thread

    I assume that this is SES-11? Edit: never mind, the article says it's SES-11 and that Koreasat 5A still doesn't have an official pad assignment. Also, it sounds like they haven't completed their damage assessment from the hurricane.
  11. First official Pluto names approved by IAU

    I was hoping that they would name something after H.P. Lovecraft but I guess there's still time since they said that more names are yet to be approved.
  12. SpaceX Discussion Thread

    It's entirely possible that they increased the size to handle the heat as well (just spit balling here). More mass = more heat capacity = less degradation from heating. I'm sure the increased temperature limit of the titanium doesn't hurt either.
  13. The NOAA gets asked about nuking hurricanes frequently enough to warrant an official response: http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5c.html Substitute "nuke" with "sonic boom" and you have your response. (Aside the radiation... unless you're using a nuclear powered aircraft... then it will be the same)
  14. SpaceX Discussion Thread

    Live with 11 minutes on the countdown clock. Weather is go according to the broadcast.
  15. Boring company

    It's more a cost and regulatory issue. Plenty of people are willing to pass the reigns to the computer. People love their autopilot but it's pretty limited in its capability compared to something like Waymo. There are already a few things that are becoming more common that are similar to autopilot: lane departure correction (and warning system) as well as adaptive cruise control/collision mitigation. With collision mitigation on track to becoming mandatory and being the basis for adaptive cruise control. As these systems become more common and reliable, both from a manufacturers standpoint and the consumer, they will slowly start to be added to the autonomous repertoire. As manufacturers increase their production volume of the systems, the costs will come down and we will see incremental increases in autonomy. However, this is still pretty basic and the implementation plan is 5 years out for passenger cars. I would say that the "autonomous only" lanes are more than 10 years away at the earliest. As for someone building an autonomous vehicle with no steering wheel or pedals, there is no regulation for that currently. Typically in the US, the federal government has regulated cars while the state governments have regulated drivers. Once you mix the two, things get tricky of which entity should make the rules since it's already a bit dicey on which states allow fully autonomous vehicles. The manufacturers have also been very cautious about just throwing something out there because it would be really easy to spook the regulators and risk an outright ban. I would say that this level of automation is also around 10 years out since the hardware is far too expensive for the average person to afford and I highly doubt the manufacturers would be willing to let it out into the uncontrolled public until thoroughly vetted. I suspect that the first scenario of autonomy slowly creeping into the market will pave the way for something fully autonomous. This will probably happen so subtly that no one would think twice about leaving it up to the computer.