Jump to content

Don't try this anywhere


wumpus
 Share

Recommended Posts

Originally I wanted to say "don't try this at home anywhere", but no strikethrough allowed in the title.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/04/pythom-space-tests-its-rocket-with-questionable-safety-practices/

This thread links to some bozos testing a hypergolic fueled rocket.  The article is extremely gentle to said corporation (the first comment in the discussion is the author stating he wrote the article for the "spicy" responses), but just watch the video.

I can only hope that they fueled the rocket *after* transporting it there and lifting it into its vertical configuration.  From the lifting sequence, it seems too heavy to be empty...

I enjoyed my part in this thread: 

And I'd like to thank the KSP community for never considering hypergolics as an option for a major stage of said rocket.  Not all the suggestions are remotely safe (there was talk of producing HTP at home), but nothing as bad as seen on this video.

PS: also check out their plans on going to Mars.  Now with even more chances to kill themselves.

Edited by wumpus
the postscript
Link to comment
Share on other sites

heres a video of one of their test firings in a "mobile test stand" read: wooden trailer. You can clearly see that large portions of the propellants are unmixed and unburned, with some sort of liquid being sprayed across the ground while a cloud of nitric acid rises into the air

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, tater said:

Am I the only one bothered by the fact they are called Python, and the logo is a bird

Pythom, not python.  I googled thinking a pythom must be some obscure bird.  No result

It is almost like the entire company is a late April Fool's joke, even the mispelled name and mismatched logo?  Idk

 

Edited by darthgently
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quoting from the article:

"When Columbus sailed to America, there were both better boats and sailors. But no one else did it. He did. All it took was three weeks. It was not difficult; it was fear that held everyone back. It was believed that one would fall over the edge of the earth. Or be eaten by sea monsters. He showed... that was wrong."

 

Hoo boy. OK, there may have been better sailors, but no, there were probably not better ships (ships, not boats).  It only took three weeks because Columbus vastly underestimated the circumference of the earth. He would have starved long before actually reaching Asia. He was just lucky the Americas were there. It wasn't fear that held everyone back; it was the knowledge that Columbus was wrong about Earth's circumference (OK, I'm vastly oversimplifying here).

"You have to work hard, but you do not have to be very smart," Tina Sjögren added.

Well, she's got that part down.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, insert_name said:

heres a video of one of their test firings in a "mobile test stand" read: wooden trailer. You can clearly see that large portions of the propellants are unmixed and unburned, with some sort of liquid being sprayed across the ground while a cloud of nitric acid rises into the air

 

That looked like a hard start to me. Those people are definitely crazy, with no concept of safety. Their program will end when they get killed. And from what I've seen in this thread, that's a when, not if.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Kerwood Floyd said:

Quoting from the article:

"When Columbus sailed to America, there were both better boats and sailors. But no one else did it. He did. All it took was three weeks. It was not difficult; it was fear that held everyone back. It was believed that one would fall over the edge of the earth. Or be eaten by sea monsters. He showed... that was wrong."

 

Hoo boy. OK, there may have been better sailors, but no, there were probably not better ships (ships, not boats).  It only took three weeks because Columbus vastly underestimated the circumference of the earth. He would have starved long before actually reaching Asia. He was just lucky the Americas were there. It wasn't fear that held everyone back; it was the knowledge that Columbus was wrong about Earth's circumference (OK, I'm vastly oversimplifying here).

"You have to work hard, but you do not have to be very smart," Tina Sjögren added.

Well, she's got that part down.

 

This reminds me of a quote by Carl Sagan that seems relevant:

"Where skeptical observation and discussion are suppressed, the truth is hidden. The proponents of such borderline beliefs, when criticized, often point to geniuses of the past who were ridiculed. But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

 

Looking at their planned Mars lander, it makes Soyuz sound spacious. It is 2.5 meters x 4 meters with fuel tanks included and the rendering makes it look like there is just about enough habitable volume for two people to uncomfortably lay down in. I don't see any rendering or discussion of any larger living space for the trip there or back. They then plan to live in a tent on Mars, which does not encourage me that they fully understand the hostility of the environment they plan to enter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

That looked like a hard start to me. Those people are definitely crazy, with no concept of safety. Their program will end when they get killed. And from what I've seen in this thread, that's a when, not if.

These vids look like fanfic extensions of Breaking Bad where the characters try to straighten up and start (sort of) making rocket fuel instead of meth or something.   It's definitely as scary as Breaking Bad and looks more dangerous than a trailer park meth lab

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, insert_name said:

heres a video of one of their test firings in a "mobile test stand" read: wooden trailer. You can clearly see that large portions of the propellants are unmixed and unburned, with some sort of liquid being sprayed across the ground while a cloud of nitric acid rises into the air

 

I also love the hypergolic happy cloud. 

So what I've pieced together from their architecture is that they have "fully reusable??!!?" hypergolic rockets that will piece together a massive spaceship and they will land on mars in unpressurized landers. 

Edited by SpaceFace545
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, satnet said:

Looking at their planned Mars lander, it makes Soyuz sound spacious. It is 2.5 meters x 4 meters with fuel tanks included and the rendering makes it look like there is just about enough habitable volume for two people to uncomfortably lay down in.

Ok, these people might be nuts, but tiny landers aren’t per say.

AVvXsEjLow91meW3G_gZFuf62TavsKBWxrp5jQQJ

http://spaceflighthistory.blogspot.com/2021/12/mssr-as-mem-1967-1968.html?m=1

Behold, a 1967 proposal to use a Mars sample return lander as a crewed lander for a 12 hour stay on Mars.

This was a normal expedition though, not permanent habitation. Bringing along a pressurized hab was also properly considered too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, insert_name said:

heres a video of one of their test firings in a "mobile test stand" read: wooden trailer. You can clearly see that large portions of the propellants are unmixed and unburned, with some sort of liquid being sprayed across the ground while a cloud of nitric acid rises into the ai

I would never stand that close to our kerosene-gOx engine...

Some university teams put their engines inside metal shipping containers for hot fire tests.

When the pressurized propellants start entering the thrust chamber, they don't burn right away. There is a big black cloud that leaves the nozzle without burning. Then the ignition occurs and lights up that material that's already outside the engine. It looks like they might have made more of a flamethrower than a rocket. The video doesn't provide any thrust data, and I wonder if they even have the sense to put a load cell on the back of the thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, darthgently said:

Pythom, not python.  I googled thinking a pythom must be some obscure bird.  No result

It is almost like the entire company is a late April Fool's joke, even the mispelled name and mismatched logo?  Idk

Are we witnessing the physical manifestation of a terrible meme?

(also, still trying to figure out what a "pythom" is. I am pretty sure they just mushed together 2 or more actual words, much like how they mushed that rocket together to make something burn.)

6 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

Well, we know what ultimately happened to Mike Hughes.

RIP...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, darthgently said:

When I read this at first I thought it was a reference to what was influencing their state of mind...

You were wrong to dismiss the double entendre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...