YNM

I wonder if perhaps there's a timeframe where these kind of events happen the most often... Maybe in an elliptical galaxy ?

And making it "magic" only requires people to not understand it, much like in Dying Earth... Although I'll say that a few things would most likely remain outside the realm of reality, like traveling faster than the speed of light wrt local spacetime, or bending them to our will, or seeing broken glass debris assemble itself back into a glass. Unless if we can prove that many-worlds theory is completely true AND we can actually manipulate them... then get your dices ready folks, we have a lot of probability to go through.

The problem would be that this heat would need to travel very far to the surface. I honestly question that if such massive tidal heating could be generated that keeps the temperature above the freezing point of water then very likely 1) the temperature beneath it would be much higher and 2) most likely you'd have to stay very close to the roche limit with the body very close to breaking up. If someone is interested to run in the numbers I'd be happy to see it, maybe assume at least Earth-like density for the satellite's solid rock body and the mass of the parent planet up to 13 jupiter masses (the largest to be accepted as a planet).

It only happens within the solid portion of the body however. Hence the most likely result is a liquid water mantle (ice-rock contact surface, as well as within the ice crust) rather than standing water on the surface (as well as the fact that ice is less dense than liquid water). If the body is entirely made out of a fluid no tidal heating effect would occur.

Liquid surface water ? Extremely unlikely. Liquid water mantle, under a crust of ice ? Practically all the major gas giant moons. What the Principia mod devs found out I think, lots of the stock configuration aren't stable.

Except if it's a stock inventory... A failed mission is still a bummer, though. It means 1) back to the drawing board and 2) if in career then that costed money.

Good point, given they're not exactly in good terms with the major presence there.

Well, at least they're just launching an empty lander part rather than people.

"Oh, there goes no. 0903294. Prepare no. 0903301 !"

Yeah but New Glenn isn't up yet...

Hey now, you either kill kerbals or you don't kill them at all... Will just say that giving them names is too much. Should've just been a registration number.

Maybe build-your-own-radome kit ? I was wondering, people kept saying about "not far north enough", since I live in the equator (literally the least north/south position possible). That being said this is a very densely populated island so land connection isn't really a problem, but other islands see considerably less density in the interior.

I mean, if they actually enter orbit first then releases landers/rovers that'd actually take more effort than direct landing. It is less dangerous but it's also more propellant. That being said, Tianwen-1 is trying to do exactly that, but again only because they're taking it safe. Other agencies had done similar before, including NASA back in 1975.

Wait, they're planning to launch their lander (if selected) on NG ?

It's only gigantic so they can be caught by astronauts doing RCS thrustering outside XD

Yeah I didn't notice the previous post was about successful insertion since it features the approach phase photo instead. Also interesting how Mariner 9 arrived 13 days before Mars 2 while being launched 11 days after.

If we count the failed orbital ejection / insertion as well, they're the 5th. Japan launched Nozomi on M-V rocket in July 1998, sadly it failed to enter Mars orbit (Earth departure failed after two lunar swing-by in December 1998, ends up having two Earth gravity assist in December 2002 and June 2003, intended Mars insertion in December 2003 failed completely and as such only resulting in 1000 km flyby). Also had that mission been a success it'd have surpassed even Mangalyaan as the smallest probe to enter Mars orbit (258 kg dry + 228 kg propellant vs. 482 kg dry + ~550 kg propellant). EDIT : Although if we count flybys then ESA would be the 5th with Rosetta (launched on Ariane 5 rather than Soyuz). But yeah if we count orbital insertions then it is the fourth. EDIT 2 : The amateur mission followers and indications :

Welcome ! Sadly the images didn't embed at all. I have a feeling that perhaps the dV is too close to the minimum requirement... while it's true that you need about 9.5 km/s of dV available for orbiting in RSS/RO, there'll most likely be losses if one consider that the launch trajectory isn't necessarily the most efficient for the rocket (esp. if you mention that you need to coast - most RSS liquid rocket launches, as does RL launches, shouldn't need to, unless if it's a solid rocket motor upper stage or something similar). The dV figures given by the in-game dV calculator only sums up to ~8.5 km/s and that might be one indicator.

802.11 protocol is either about 2.4 or 5/6 GHz, although there is a standard for 60 GHz (802.11ad, 802.11aj, 802.11ay). Starlink from what I can see use Ku, Ka or E band which is 12-18, 26-40 and 60-90 GHz so I think water vapor isn't an issue ? (K band is divided into Ku and Ka because of water absorption.)

This hasn't been posted here yet so : Livestream starts Feb 18 2:15 PM EST (Feb 18 11:15 AM PST, Feb 18 19:15 UTC, Feb 19 02:15 UTC+7). Touchdown approx. Feb 18 3:15 PM EST (Feb 18 12:15 PM PST, Feb 18 20:15 UTC, Feb 19 03:15 UTC+7). Confirmation would only come after the light delay ofc.

Yeah, like I said, it depends on where exactly that happened. Private roads might be OK, public roads you might've committed an offense. (the first 'might' is because some private roads are used often enough to be regarded as a public road; the second 'might' is because it depends a lot on your jurisdiction and enforcement.)

Cryptomarkets can be built as quickly as they fall. I knew some guy who tried to do like... what was it... SNX or something. There was also like some kinda wallet-issued stuff and such and such... Swap something ? Sushi ? idk. Like I said, it's not about riding the wave itself, but it's about how to fly from there. Also, elon isn't entirely blind to markets - he did Paypal, after all.

I honestly wouldn't question the ability of machines to control stuff to a higher precision than humans do - given existing stuff like CNC or ATO on trains and it's already abundantly clear that we simply don't trust humans to do it up to such barriers, and even when we do we often opt to make sure that we're overseeing a machine doing it instead (like autopilot on aircraft, it doesn't remove the liability of the pilot but it greatly lessens the load). The real question IMO is how do we exactly "teach" the algorithm about things that even humans are often not entirely sure about. Do you get the bests in the field to work on it, or outsource it to the cheapest bidder to do menial data cleaning ? Although if it's in relation to that spinning car thing then that's a physical limit, I'd be willing to bet that whoever is the owner of that vehicle didn't put on winter tires or other measures to avoid slipping on ice/snow, and might risk themselves to offenses of the traffic codes of the place.

The problem isn't whether it hits a certain point or not, the question is whether you can actually fly off the waves before it crashes into the beach (again).

It's coming together...