-
Posts
7,146 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by CatastrophicFailure
-
-
Raptor Vacuum durability testing at Starbase.
-
5 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:
Quiz 1 for my Freshmen garnered 61% 'Fs', due in large part to the 6 map questions included in the quiz. Also, they were not taking notes and had not studied.
Just graded Quiz 3
61% of my Freshmen garnered 'As', due in large part to crushing the 18 map questions on the latest quiz. Also, they're now taking notes, studying and working together to improve.
I call that a win.
...
Now to see if I can get my Juniors to come around. One class did quite well... The other?
Not so much.
-
24 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:
Woot! It's time to get psyched for Psyche! Of course, the real time to get psyched is when it arrives in ~six years
Seriously, I didn't realize that it was finally almost time to launch Psyche.
All hail the mighty Falcon Heavy!
This is the dual-drone ship landing too, right?
-
1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:
How about KSC? Don’t they literally have a second launch site there, currently being converted for Starship ops?
In short, no. That site is for operational flights, not test flights. As in, once the bugs have been largely worked out. And even then NASA is concerned enough that SpaceX needs to build an entirely new crew access arm at Pad 40 specifically because of the risk to 39A from having Starship right there.
58 minutes ago, Exploro said:I concur with Sunlit, the existence and continued development of Starship facilities at LC-39A demonstrates an alternative option.
Back in the Falcon 1 days, SpaceX had to launch all the way out at Kwajalein because the Air Force wouldn’t let them near the existing facilities at Vandenburg, too many unknowns at the time. So no, it can’t just move to an existing facility, and in all likelihood they’d still be facing the same bureaucratic issues there.
1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:The processes take time. Unless you can prove that they are being done for superfluous reasons, criticism of their pace of work as being a sign of incompetence is conspiratorial.
The process. Hasn’t. Even. Started.
The FAA has done their thing already, so why hasn’t the DFW even started? And if they have, why so opaque about it? That’s not conspiracy, that’s accountability.
1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:This is also conspiratorial. Unless you have evidence of some kind to support this accusation.
It’s not an accusation, it’s an IF/THEN. Since the DFW has been against this project from the get go, yes, I question the motives of those pulling the strings, again because of the complete lack of transparency and accountability.
No one is saying, “don’t regulate.” No one is saying, “just light that candle!” We’re saying do so in a timely and open manner, specifically to avoid this very nonsense!
1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:It’s his opinion. There is no “bad form”. Correct him and move on, never discourage someone from sharing their views just because they might make a mistake.
It’s not a “mistake,” it’s a cheap shot. He’s better than that.
-
13 hours ago, mikegarrison said:
SpaceX chose to locate in the middle of a wildlife sanctuary.
Chose. To.
No. Incorrect. Wrong.
Unless you think building a launch site in, say, the middle of downtown Corpus Christi is somehow a valid choice. As others have pointed out, there is literally nowhere else in the US they could have placed a launch site without ruffling SOMEone’s feathers. The lesser of evils really isn’t much of a choice.
13 hours ago, mikegarrison said:I'm just awfully tired of people complaining that regulators are doing their jobs.
No. The thing people are complaining about is, very specifically, regulators NOT doing their jobs. As in, for reasons yet unknown, they haven’t even started. That is an entirely valid thing to complain about, especially if the FDW is intentionally using the situation as some sort of pocket veto.
14 hours ago, mikegarrison said:"Manufacturer extraordinaire"? I mean, Boeing builds 737s at a rate of more than one per day. And don't try to tell me a Falcon second stage is harder to build than a commercial airliner.
I’m sorry bud, I really am, but you just show your true colors here. Your comments are usually lucid and insightful but this just stinks of sour grapes. Bad form.
-
10 hours ago, steve9728 said:
But… yeah why they just put the price so that “robbery”… This is simply forcing piracy to occur.
That’s how the printer companies (infamously) make their money, sell you the printer for cheap then bilk you for ink endlessly. The original subscription model.
8 hours ago, TheSaint said:Mine isn't that bad. But I know if I go forward one revision on the firmware the printer will stop working if it detects a non-HP toner cartridge. So I am stuck on this firmware revision forever.
Wait is that even legal? They can force you to use their own crap?
-
2 hours ago, darthgently said:
When playing KSP I am hesitant to deorbit and destroy any thing I've managed to get into orbit. The price has been paid too get it there, right?
It would be cool if those second stages could slowly, and efficiently, autonomously rendezvous over time and latch together then at some point perhaps at least the engines could be recovered and maybe the rest could be repurposed ala Skylab at some future date. A poor man's orbital reef?
Anyway, at least recover the engines
Not worth the investment, financial and every other sense. Remember, they nixed plans to recover second stages already because they just can’t justify the effort needed for any kind of recovery. Space debris is a real concern also.
The answer to most “they should just…” or “why don’t they..?” questions is STARSHIP. That’s it. That’s the solution. That’s the end result of a couple decades of rocket-building experience as to how to do everything better.
-
-
1 hour ago, DDE said:
I'm not exactly a master of Ukrainian but I haven't heard a single swear word in there.
I meant the hamster.
-
21 hours ago, DDE said:
There's a longer bit of... battle footage.
Heheh oh yeah, just didn’t know much much cussing there might be.
-
5 hours ago, DDE said:
which is a hamster
Careful, I’ve heard things about those Russian hamsters…
Spoiler -
There’s this… which despite the usual hullabaloo seems like more nothing…
-
2 hours ago, RCgothic said:
That's definitely a thing you do when ready to launch.
Almost.
3 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:Lot of talk of ungulates on this board, lately
https://x.com/austinbarnard45/status/1702057715051253848 -
I walked a goat today.
I must admit, when I woke up this morning, those are not words I was expecting to utter today.
We came around the corner on the way home and my wife was like, "that's... not a deer..." He was just standing there in the middle of the road looking cornfused. She noted the collar on him, so I parked, hopped out, grabbed a random leash from the back seat, and turns out he's incredibly friendly. Or hungry. Or both. He came right up to me and proceeded to lick my hand, at which point we very nearly owned our first goat. Sigh. But yeah, we figured he belonged to a neighbor and got loose. So some mild drama and a walk around the loop ensued until we found his caretaker out looking for him. Apparently his actual owner is somewhat AWOL, too.
Oh, and his name is William.
Gonna have to step up our efforts on that goat pen now...
3 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:We need a polite way to down vote horrible things like this.
I hate to break it to you but this is for Christmas 2027...
-
All 63 requirements have either been completed or are for future flights…
also 90+ cameras.
-
Meanwhile, across the pad…
Ship 26 has been rolled out for testing. Quite the head-scratcher, this. Lots of speculation that it’s a prototype expendable tanker/orbiting fuel depot/fuel-transfer tester, but in any of those cases it’s odd that it still has tile pins and mounting hardware for fins.
Just now, mikegarrison said:When fighters have twin engines buried in the fuselage, they often have a massive piece of structure between them to try and isolate one engine from the result of failure of the other.
IIRC there’s upgrades on this booster specifically for that.
-
1 hour ago, PakledHostage said:
Sounds to me like SpaceX has some homework to do... Let's hope that they're A-students and were already on it like a fly on poo last Tuesday.
Sounds to me like they’ve already done it.
-
On 9/6/2023 at 10:39 PM, Nuke said:
so cat walked on the keyboard and chrome help came up, rather than removing the cat and undoing the damage, i entered "there is a cat on my keyboard". finding no useful information, i minimized chrome and hit f1 again to get windows help. and with cortana shoved into an oubliette somewhere, bing came up and greeted me with an article about cats on keyboards. neither source suggested simply removing the cat (of course expect recompencement, cats are big on revenge).
+1 for “oubliette.”
-
1 hour ago, RCgothic said:
This isn't the first time the FAA have issued a nothing-burger statement like this as I recall.
It's not news the next launch license needs to wait on the mishap investigation and this statement says nothing about timescale. It's just their standard "Stop hassling us. It'll be done when it's done," press release.
Yup. As someone deep in that X thread said, this would be the FAA’s response whether it was the day after IFT-1 or the day before the new launch license was granted.
Bit fun tho to scroll through the comments and watch, sigh, “both sides” blow it all out of proportion.
-
-
16 hours ago, Royalswissarmyknife said:
S25 is on the move!
And going up.
-
Gave the puppy a piece of pancake as a treat.
He’s now decided it’s the greatest toy EVER and has spent the last hour evenly distributing it around the living room.
[WeNeedAFacepalm.gif]
-
13 hours ago, Exoscientist said:
SpaceX engineers wanted to have flame diverters for the SuperHeavy/Starship launch but they were overruled by Elon for cost and time reasons. Elon really wanted to make that 4/20 date.
[citation needed]
-
6 hours ago, magnemoe said:
First Starship recovery in Q3 2024, where to land it is my question. They would need to overfly continental US and even Mexico for landing at Boca Chica.
This doesn’t seem like a big showstopper to me. The Shuttle did this dozens of times. Dragon regularly does. And by the time Starship actually attempts it, they’ll have a LOT of data from, and presumably several successes at, bellyflopping into the Pacific.
Russian Launch and Mission Thread
in Science & Spaceflight
Posted
Just strap enough Protons to it to get it out of the atmosphere before lighting that nuclear candle. Simple.