Kerwood Floyd

Cool. I had a couple of problems with the book, but they would be easily fixed in a film

My son, my grandson, and I drove about 5 hours to Lake Wappapello State Park, in southeast Missouri. I would do it again in a heartbeat. Probably the most amazing thing I will ever see. It was dang near perfect. Great visibility. We saw the prominence on the lower limb. We saw Venus and Jupiter. And there was hardly any traffic on the way home. Totally different from our 2017 experience.

OK, I'm convinced. Thanks, all. Returning to lurk mode

I don't think anyone has actually answered my question, though. Did the FAA not considered the failure to land the booster (however unnecessary and experimental that was) to be a mishap that required investigation? In other words (to quote Tom Lehrer pretending to quote Werner von Braun) "Once the rocket's up who cares where it comes down?"

It seems to me there's a lot of flamey-boomy in this video: I don't see how this doesn't count as "blowing up rockets"

I wasn't paying much attention back when SpaceX were developing Falcon 9. My impression is that they blew up a lot of rockets. My question is: did they have to do a mishap investigation and wait for a new FAA launch license after each of those tests?

I read Minmus Taster's post as sarcasm. YMMV

Yeah, to me, this is the big question. I really want to know, for both vehicles, but especially for SH, whether they were destroyed by FTS, or suffered some catastrophic failure before FTS had a chance to activate.

Is my memory playing tricks on me? I remember in the immediate aftermath of IFT-1 seeing a lot of speculation that flying debris might have been the culprit.

Wow, Very interesting reading. Unless the leaks that led to the fires were caused by flying pad debris, it sounds like the disintegration of the pad had little to do with the in-flight engine failures.

It could also (imo, probably does) mean that they concluded it was GSE related, not engine related. If they did work that they think will fix the GSE problems, we wouldn't necessarily know about it. Which is the point @tater was making when asking the question (again, imo).

A lot depends on what you mean by "the 'major' Asian languages". English is more closely related to Hindi than either is to Mandarin. If you have in mind what I would call "East Asian languages", it seems that the Chinese languages, Korean, and Japanese are no more related to each other than they are to any of the Indo-European languages.

It seems you are forgetting what the U in RUD stands for. That RD is very much not U. (j/k)

nevermind

I think I must be missing something. Much of the discussion up-thread about the FTS seems to be speculating that the charges were undersized. It seems to me that the charges, once they were activated, worked just fine The problem is that the charges didn't go off until ~40s after the command was sent. Or am I misinformed?

I am far from a smart guy (I get the feeling you're smarter than I am) but . . . I think the secret is that temperature and heat are not exactly the same thing. I remember once reading a similar discussion wherein a smart guy pointed out that, while the average temperature of North Atlantic water is not much above freezing, it still contains a tremendous amount of heat energy. In a similar way, I think those interstellar clouds of gas contain very little heat energy while having a high temperature.

SCE to AUX!

Scrub

And (if I counted correctly) 63 consecutive successful landings (I consider the successful launch streak more important than the successful landing streak)

I am in Illinois, and even northern Illinois, but in an area of pretty severe light pollution, so I'm not expecting to see much

Geez, seriously? Are you trying to make me feel ancient on purpose? I remember being a kid watching the Gemini 7 flight.

No. Very roughly speaking all objects are moving away from each other. (This is a ridiculous oversimplification . . . ). This is very much not the same thing as "every object moves away from one point". The point you are looking for does not exist.

Seems like a pretty outlandish hypothesis. I can't imagine something like that scenario actually . . . <oh, crap>

That thing is cursed! I wouldn't fly on it (in it?) for all the money in the world

None of which, of course, answers your original question, which boils down to, what are the radiuses of those zones? A very interesting question, that I certainly can't answer. But I'll bet someone, somewhere, somewhen has done the calcs.