JoeSchmuckatelli

I'm not sure that's the proper technique

In the image above, it and the booster are at the same angle - so most likely due to the camera lens

s'Truth

The paperwork mass will exceed engine mass. Ouch {Thanks for the article!}

Guys take a job like this knowing that fingers will point. The hope is that they will be 'there goes the guy who made it happen' fingers - but the ever present risk is the opposite. Hell we used to joke that the primary purpose of a Lieutenant was to have someone to blame. Buck has to stop somewhere.

How galling it must be to have worked so hard on something like this - and then know it is gonna be a reef. Any chance they'll have a drone ship out there "just in case" they have the power to attempt to land the booster? Or even S20 (which is the most unlikely - but maybe worth a shot?) Can they even recover the ships if they are soft landed in the ocean?

@mikegarrisongrin! While I never worked in 'traditional aerospace' you could say that I grew up in it (AirResearch - > Garrett - > AlliedSignal - > Honeywell). Professionally I was on the 'customer side' of the equation, where I enjoyed using the goodies - but have to acknowledge I was in the branch often treated as the *edited*child of procurement and development. Truth told, I'm actually a fan of the companies that have brought us to where we are... But I'm also skeptical about the bureaucracy and conservative business practices of the industry. (Equally critical of the government side, btw). The debate at hand seems a comparison of styles in the development of new and current systems, and what people are expressing frustration about is the lagging progress towards private space competition. The promise of Branson, Bezos and Musk getting involved was pretty heady stuff. But if you look at where we are - Branson seems sidelined by tourism, Bezos seems trapped in the conservative industry norms, and Musk is gloriously tearing it up. You bring up a good point - Bezos may be playing the long game and when the dust settles be the last man standing... But from the spectator perspective - there is really only one show in town. I'd love to see BO / ULA succeed - frankly we need them to. Till then, as a sideline fan... Raspberries are the norm!

I see it a bit differently - Bezos and Musk approached their interest in space uniquely. Bezos followed a traditional 'investment' approach - where he hired folks to realize his dream. Musk followed the entrepreneurial route and told people to keep up. Bezos is somewhat at the mercy of 'the experts' who are schooled in traditional Aerospace, where you are both risk-averse and need to wait for funding before doing anything. Musk is... well, Musk. I mean - think about it: Musk regularly answers questions about the rockets and ships, which shows he's intimately involved in the design and production. Bezos talks big picture. I think Bruno at ULA thought he'd be getting a Musk-level of entrepreneurial effort out of BO - and instead they got 'traditional aerospace'. Bezos could change all of that - but I'm not sure he's ready for the level of personal investment it would take to get there. (By which I mean his undivided attention, rather than his money).

OSHA Approved for 7 man lift?

They are gonna be perilously close to the max height/weight lift for that crane. I wonder if they'll anchor it somehow.

That's the big problem - if you say you want space based power to send to the planet... You probably don't know what you are talking about, or are trying obscure the fact that you are making a space based weapon. Like asteroid mining - the economics of bringing it back down just don't make sense - probably best to just keep space based power and materials for use in space based applications and construction.

https://www.russianspaceweb.com/tem.html Some interesting photos for scale

@DDE - as an aside, while the Western press loves to tout some new capability or another... When it comes to Artillery, RU leads the way. If you want to see what is capable - they have some really impressive systems that the US and et.al. are just trying to keep up with (largely due to how each 'side' views the efficacy and purpose of arty in the respective order of battle - which drives investment and procurement) *I suspect you are already aware of this - but it's worth acknowledging the leader in the field

Wow - you really are prepared for post-modern corporate feudalism!

A purpose built guided launcher might be built smooth bore to better service the rounds - but most artillery is operated as an area effect weapon, rather than a point target, and thus cheap spin stabilized rounds are fine. So a multi purpose gun is likely to be rifled to send the cheap stuff - meaning the expensive guided round needs to be a little more expensive to compensate. Offering the expensive stuff gives the GP arty a bit more flexibility - and while they're talking about increased range, the big benefits are reduced collateral damage when aiming at bad guys using civilian areas as cover

https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/science/2021/08/nasa-science-chief-says-its-ok-to-be-worried-or-terrified-about-webb/%3famp=1 "One more Arianne 5 launch must go well..." So, September - and then the tension can really begin

Look at this They illustrate cyclic changes there in a different context like that @mikegarrison described

This is interesting (thermoelectric) https://www.google.com/amp/s/phys.org/news/2019-11-material-world-electricity.amp And a new advance that is supposed to be cheap https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.interestingengineering.com/engineers-develop-highly-efficient-material-that-converts-waste-heat-into-energy

I'm enjoying the parenthetical retitling of the threads lately. That out of the way - the Green movement proponents of the 80s who were so vehemently against nuclear have actually been part of the resurgence in interest in nuclear, from what I can tell. Some of the more educated among them looked at the coal / petrochemical pollution risk vs long term nuclear risks and they are actually now advocating for nuclear energy, while others are simply not protesting. There is still the NIMBY problem... But more than that - getting plants completed and new ones authorized is a problem https://www.google.com/amp/s/api.nationalgeographic.com/distribution/public/amp/environment/article/nuclear-plants-are-closing-in-the-us-should-we-build-more

Talk about wishing there was a a camera that could resolve this and let us watch from the 3d person perspective How are they going to catch off to the side and then rotate around to the launch platform? I've yet to see anything on the tower that looks like it can do that

Always underestimating the humans. NI has never been their strong point, but their SI allowed them to conquer all biomes

Ah - so this relates to the 'X' shaped placement over the '+' shape of Falcon?

Would you mind expanding on this?

Also - in case y'all missed this: NASA finally knows what is beneath the surface of Mars (inverse.com)

Anyone else spot the congruence of the ancient and modern?