tater Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 Any artsy people here in school? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 (edited) On 3/5/2019 at 9:35 AM, tater said: Any artsy people here in school? I tried to think of something that could be done with magnets, but after some research I discovered that magnets can't really orbit each other. Plus the capsule is probably magnetic to an extent and that would throw it off. I may think of something else... Wait... I think I have an idea. OoooooOOOoOoO)0)oOoo)()()()()OOOOOOooOOOo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Edited March 14, 2019 by Ultimate Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightside Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 I already think that their naming scheme is trite and derivative of the achievements of others, and now they’ve gone away from their own pattern... Lindbergh didn’t even go to space. Are they building a transatlantic capsule? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 Pretty odd. Perhaps a biconic vehicle that can land horizontally? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 Now I'm thinking about their stupid naming scheme. New Shepard? OK, makes sense, a suborbital rocket to carry PEOPLE, since Alan Shepard was a person. New Glenn? Makes no sense unless it carries humans to orbit, IMO. New Armstrong? Same, but needs to carry humans to the lunar surface (else call it New Borman). New Lindbergh? It needs to carry humans across an ocean through the air (or mostly through the air). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 13 minutes ago, tater said: Now I'm thinking about their stupid naming scheme. New Shepard? OK, makes sense, a suborbital rocket to carry PEOPLE, since Alan Shepard was a person. New Glenn? Makes no sense unless it carries humans to orbit, IMO. New Armstrong? Same, but needs to carry humans to the lunar surface (else call it New Borman). New Lindbergh? It needs to carry humans across an ocean through the air (or mostly through the air). Maybe it's not about humans, but about rockets themselves. Suborbital, orbital, lunar, transoceanic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 29 minutes ago, sh1pman said: Maybe it's not about humans, but about rockets themselves. Suborbital, orbital, lunar, transoceanic? Clearly it must be, I just think it's sorta goofy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 5 minutes ago, tater said: Clearly it must be, I just think it's sorta goofy. Sorta Like naming an online bookstore after a rain forest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 3 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Sorta Like naming an online bookstore after a rain forest? He’d call it New Alexandria or something like that if he followed the same naming scheme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuyWithALongUsername Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 9 hours ago, tater said: Now I'm thinking about their stupid naming scheme. New Shepard? OK, makes sense, a suborbital rocket to carry PEOPLE, since Alan Shepard was a person. New Glenn? Makes no sense unless it carries humans to orbit, IMO. New Armstrong? Same, but needs to carry humans to the lunar surface (else call it New Borman). New Lindbergh? It needs to carry humans across an ocean through the air (or mostly through the air). Well, I think the plan was always to human-rate NG, and we know too little about NA to assume that it DOESN'T ultimately take people to the lunar surface... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canopus Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 https://spacenews.com/blue-origin-studying-repurposing-of-new-glenn-upper-stages/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reactordrone Posted March 23, 2019 Share Posted March 23, 2019 On 3/20/2019 at 2:31 AM, tater said: Now I'm thinking about their stupid naming scheme. New Shepard? OK, makes sense, a suborbital rocket to carry PEOPLE, since Alan Shepard was a person. New Glenn? Makes no sense unless it carries humans to orbit, IMO. New Armstrong? Same, but needs to carry humans to the lunar surface (else call it New Borman). New Lindbergh? It needs to carry humans across an ocean through the air (or mostly through the air). But it's Lindbergh so it's only got to carry one person transatlantic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightside Posted March 23, 2019 Share Posted March 23, 2019 Or Jeff Bezos is developing a new dance. Can you patent a dance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racescort666 Posted March 23, 2019 Share Posted March 23, 2019 41 minutes ago, Nightside said: Can you patent a dance? You could probably copyright protect a choreographed set so sort of? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wumpus Posted March 23, 2019 Share Posted March 23, 2019 3 minutes ago, Racescort666 said: You could probably copyright protect a choreographed set so sort of? There are multiple rappers/dancers/actors suing Epic over Fortnight dances. No idea how it will turn out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
55delta Posted March 23, 2019 Share Posted March 23, 2019 7 hours ago, Nightside said: Can you patent a dance? Just to get the answer out of the way quick, no. Although the relevant law initially sounds like it, there's a distinct (although not always clear) difference between say, The Twist (as a dance) and the performance of The Nutcracker (as a series of choreographed sets). Not sure if that made sense to you. If you're still confused, I recommend the Lawful Masses with Leonard French video, 2 Milly Denied Fortnite Dance Copyright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightside Posted March 23, 2019 Share Posted March 23, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, 55delta said: Just to get the answer out of the way quick, no. Although the relevant law initially sounds like it, there's a distinct (although not always clear) difference between say, The Twist (as a dance) and the performance of The Nutcracker (as a series of choreographed sets). Not sure if that made sense to you. If you're still confused, I recommend the Lawful Masses with Leonard French video, 2 Milly Denied Fortnite Dance Copyright. Fair enough, I suppose JB is not trying to re-do the Lindy Hop, I guess it’s probably just another idea for a transcontinental ballistic transport. Edited March 23, 2019 by Nightside Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 (edited) So, probably nothing, but I know a guy who knows a guy who works at BO, who implies there may be something significant happening very shortly. In more confirmable news, I read that BO has now filed regulatory paperwork for NS flight 13 in July. Flights 11 and 12 haven’t happened yet. Would indicate rather a brisk pace, tho... ah, here that is... Edited March 28, 2019 by CatastrophicFailure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 If they have filed for 13 but not 11 and 12, would that imply that flight 13 will be more significant than the others? Maybe the first crewed flight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 2 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said: If they have filed for 13 but not 11 and 12, would that imply that flight 13 will be more significant than the others? Maybe the first crewed flight? The impression I got was that the paperwork for the other two flights has already been filed. They gotta have FCC approval for all of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 1 minute ago, CatastrophicFailure said: The impression I got was that the paperwork for the other two flights has already been filed. They gotta have FCC approval for all of them. Ah, okay, never mind then. But the first crewed flight might happen around that time, still... If their newest booster, tail 4, flies a test flight on 11, most likely another cargo flight on tail 3 does flight 12. Flight 13 would probably be of tail 4 again, which would probably be another unmanned test, but maybe not... That puts the first crew anywhere from 13 to 17, I'd say, if they continue alternating tail 3 and 4. TBH I'd probably trust New Shepard enough that I would fly on the very next flight, even if it's tail 3. They have demonstrated safety a lot, with 10 flights that were (unless they're not disclosing a failure) survivable. They have done a parachute out test, an abort test, and a maximum altitude re-entry test. While, admittedly, this is not the final version of the crew capsule, Dragon 2 and Starliner are only doing one unmanned test, Orion 1 and a half, and Virgin Galactic zero. While they want to be cautious, I think they could reasonably go for crew in the coming months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 28 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: The impression I got was that the paperwork for the other two flights has already been filed. They gotta have FCC approval for all of them. Do you know what the approximate timelines for flights 11 and 12 are? Any paperwork on that? I get the impression that you don't, but if you do that would be great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaverickSawyer Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 52 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: So, probably nothing, but I know a guy who knows a guy who works at BO, who implies there may be something significant happening very shortly. As I also have contacts at BO, I have a fairly good idea of what your contact may be hinting at... it's probably not what you think. Beyond that, I cannot say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 3 minutes ago, MaverickSawyer said: As I also have contacts at BO, I have a fairly good idea of what your contact may be hinting at... it's probably not what you think. Beyond that, I cannot say. Figures. It’s just Pudding Day in the cafeteria, idin’ it? 11 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said: Do you know what the approximate timelines for flights 11 and 12 are? Any paperwork on that? I get the impression that you don't, but if you do that would be great. No idea. Someone willing to sort through reams of virtual govt paperwork could probably find out, tho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.