Comments by "Digital Nomad" (@digitalnomad9985) on "Scott Manley" channel.

  1. "why don't just threaten to destroy surface from space?" Because to get something from them (other than information) you have to give them exit tech. If you piss them off, they can climb the exit tech and hurt you. There are likely to be more of them on the larger planet than there are currently on Earth, particularly more than you brought with you. Despotism is inefficient.
    80
  2. "five times" I'm counting four. 1. The Apollo-Shuttle time gap. 2.& 3. Two brief suspensions in Shuttle flights for study after each of two separate fatal Shuttle accidents. 4. The Shuttle-Crew Dragon Time gap. The Soyuz vehicle was first launched in 1967, in the middle of the Apollo program. The Soviets were, of course, the first to send a man to orbit, but previous launches were with earlier vehicles. The Russian space program has afforded mostly continuous manned access to orbit from Gagarin's orbital flight in "Vostok 1" to the present day and pioneered orbital space stations. That means there was at least one more time that Russian vehicles provided the only manned access to space, but not Soyuz.
    13
  3. They didn't have an auto land system ready then. They did before the end of the program. They weren't confident of the performance parameters under mission conditions until they had flown a few missions.
    12
  4.  @imanalfarizi6214  The first module was launched from Baikonur. The vast majority of the modules and components were launched from Florida in the cargo bay of the Shuttle.
    11
  5. @Peter Evans All a union can do is threaten to strike. How is that going to prevent doing away with pilots?
    10
  6. @Peter Evans All a union can do is threaten to strike. How is that going to prevent doing away with pilots?
    7
  7.  @hadeskiller1  "Joking about hundreds of people with families being potentially out of work for the sake of a meme is funny, right? I guess I shouldn’t be surprised since all the internet space enthusiasts aren’t actually involved in the space industry developing these technologies" You've backed into the essence of the problem with Boeing/ULA, and too many of the nation's federal programs. It is morally wrong to regard our space program as a jobs program for well-connected aerospace companies. (Just as it is wrong to regard our education system as a jobs program for teachers and the teachers' union, as the current system does). When a particular group has had something for a long time they begin to think of it as theirs. "What's good for GM is good for America." If Boeing's space division ever does recover and become a LEGITIMATE part of human progress in space again, it will be because Elon Musk and a few others lit a fire under their posteriors. Men of goodwill among Boeing's employees and subcontractors agree, along with anybody who believes in the future of man in space or simply believes in honest dealing in business and government. The basis of the humor of the thread opening statement is not cruelty, but the defiance of entrenched corruption with the truth.
    5
  8. The same way. You see them zipping them up in the video. They only had them on for launch, spacewalk, and reentry. You will notice that the maestra didn't have hers on for the concert. It makes the violin harder to play. No. Why would they? All three needed to don their suits during the SPACEWALK, because there was no airlock: opening the hatch means depressurizing the cabin, not during the whole flight. They wore the suits during takeoff and reentry as a safety precaution, and during the spacewalk out of necessity.
    4
  9. You are discussing philosophy. This discussion is about (known) aerospace tech, applied to a different environment. Even if you're right, (And how can we establish whether you are?) you're off topic.
    4
  10.  @tg1431  "because the cost of Nimitz - Kittyhawk Class carriers is 1 Million A day." A lot of that is pay. You can run a rocket carrier cheaper because it's not a warship, it doesn't need a crew of thousands.
    4
  11.  @bradnewsbear  Well if you're the sort that would object to calling the condition on Ring City or an O'Niel Cylander "artificial gravity", its not going to be your sort making this happen. We don't insist on being wrong, we just don't like trolls.
    4
  12.  @NochZvezd4  The joke has nothing to do with the earth being flat. It assumes that the Earth is Earth shaped and that down is from the North Pole to the south pole, as it is for a globe rather than a planet, instead of toward the center as it is for planets.
    3
  13. The high inclination orbit also makes ISS useless as a staging area for missions to the Moon and beyond. For that you would want it in the ecliptic plane.
    3
  14.  @DavidOfWhitehills  "And yet you have no problem with 'thunkit?" You knew "thunkit" wasn't standard English. You apparently didn't know "must of been" isn't. The latter is an abomination and must be destroyed. Where it comes from is folk hear contractions like "must've" "could've" "should've" (contractions of "- have") and mistakenly HEAR them as "- of". It's not a usage, it's a misunderstanding.
    3
  15.  @nagualdesign  You're not much up on recent world events, are you?
    3
  16.  @WarrenGarabrandt  The burning rivers stopped a long time before the EPA came along. The agency was not the beginning of what we now call "environmental regulation".
    3
  17.  @honkhonk8009  I probably learned it in school, I doubt that they do nowadays. And most of my classmates forgot it. No, this is definitely a space nerd filter.
    3
  18. There was no failure. His tenure came to an end, as statute prescribes.
    3
  19. Midwestern US American here and I do, too. I pronounce "w" as "w" and "wh" as "hw" usually, except for "who" which I pronounce 'hoo".
    3
  20. If you mean the one that broke, obviously not. Everybody involved is back on land, safe and sound.
    3
  21. Everything starts with the rich. Indoor pumbing. Cars. Air Conditioning. If you want to deny the rich luxuries then say goodbye to material progress.
    3
  22. Chronological order?
    2
  23. Are you joking? Show me a spacewalk photograph with stars. In a well lit foreground you can't see stars in the background. Tell me this is not the first time you've heard this. And if it isn't, why are you trolling?
    2
  24.  @johncrowerdoe5527  Perhaps not water because using a cryogen would test it on closer to operational conditions.
    2
  25.  @Jesse-cw5pv  1. We don't need higher tech than them to reach them before they reach us if they have twice the orbital velocity we do. 2. Numbers DO matter. Take a modern Marine Expeditionary Unit and supporting amphib flotilla supplemented with a bunch of cargo ships and try conquering 17th century North America and watch your ass get handed to you. You aren't carrying your entire military with you, you are carrying an expeditionary force. You lose. You are envisioning a situation (whole modern US military vs 17th century native Americans) where the invaders have near numerical parity in addition to a tech advantage. That is not the scenario being examined.
    2
  26.  @AsbestosMuffins  "the other is a politcian seriously asking if we can just move the move the moon" [sic] Of course it is nothing of the sort. The question is obvious irony. What is the point of media figures and YT commenters pretending not to understand irony? And who do you think you're fooling by doing so?
    2
  27.  @skoovee  His seed money was his PayPal money, what was left after he payed off his college debt, and other investors. There is no way that his dad had that kind of money. His dad worked for somebody else, and not as a CEO.
    2
  28. It took all the engineering SpaceX could muster to make soft cryogens (oxy/methane) work with fiber composite tanks, to save weight. At the current state of art, hard cryogens like hydrogen require metal tanks. Hydrogen is also bulkier per unit energy than methane, and burned in molar mix with oxygen, methane produces two molecules of water for every molecule of carbon dioxide. It is semi-clean, like natural gas, same stuff. A jet airliner in it's lifetime will insert more carbon into the atmosphere than NASA, SpaceX, and Virgin combined ever will in the forseeable future. When you've shut down civilian aviation, call me and I'll still have your travel plans booked.
    2
  29. "We can expect Raytheon to build us spacesuits with lazers like Moonraker." At that price they'd better.
    2
  30.  @davisdf3064  And the Great Wall is not a current border.
    2
  31. Those services are a function of the "backpack" life support unit (not included) (yet).
    2
  32. Isn't the central remnant an "astrobleme"?
    2
  33. @Peter Evans The rest of us try to refute an argument with a counterargument. But not you. Because you can't. I just debunked your statement.
    2
  34. In the video he said that the live spacewalk video was carried on the traditional NASA spacecraft telemetry link, which uses 3 GSO sattelites and ground stations.
    2
  35. This entire mission was privately funded. Not a cent of tax money.
    2
  36.  @scottmanley  3:15 "We've just had our glitch for this mission."
    2
  37. Speaking of space salvage, aren't their enough large pieces floating around now to send up a smelter and start recycling the orbital junk into parts for larger space stations and spacecraft?
    2
  38.  @Yora21  However, one is supposed to have killed a dog in Egypt.
    2
  39.  @pieterbezuidenhout2741  If you think that Iranian nuclear/ICBM technology is irrelevant to your well being, you are mistaken.
    2
  40. Yes, having the hatch open explosively and blow out every loose object in the cabin would be suboptimal.
    2
  41. Do you mean the bends? Nitrogen narcosis happens when you're breathing a partial pressure of 4 atmospheres of Nitrogen or more. It's a problem for divers that must equalize the high pressure in deep dives. They mix noble gasses in the breathing mix to avoid nitrogen narcosis and keep the Nitrogen pressure low. Beyond a certain point, they need a mix of 3 or more gasses. Not an issue in spaceflight, until we need to use a flexible spacesuit on a planet with more than 4 atmospheres of surface pressure, or unless the life support system malfunctions and lets in too much Nitrogen.
    2
  42. We are going to have to learn how to STICK BUILD structures in orbit out of metal extrusions. Once we build a big enough dry dock, we can build structures within it at our leisure. We need to learn to recycle orbital debris in situ for materials (there is a lot floating around and it is safer to collect it anyway, it is MASS IN ORBIT, which is otherwise hard to come by).
    2
  43. There is a common misunderstanding that asteroids are all the same thing. Also, Manley's projection seems to assume this trick is easier for larger objects. The opposite is true. With a maximum spin rate of 2 RPM, you can get useful gravity with natural materials, like basalt and granite. Nobody is going to try to spin up a slagpile. This is a "straw man" post.
    2
  44. Who said they can't remove the suits? If they need help to put them on and take them off, they have it. The maestra did the concert in the capsule in orbit and outside the suit, so obviously they CAN take them off. All three needed to don their suits during the SPACEWALK, because there was no airlock: opening the hatch means depressurizing the cabin, not during the whole flight. They wore the suits during takeoff and reentry as a safety precaution, and during the spacewalk out of necessity.
    2
  45. They said that there were software problems.
    2
  46. Where did I park that thing?
    2
  47. Starlink is necessary to replace lost Iridium flares.
    2
  48. "Everyone's going to the Moon."
    2
  49. No, just the highest. That Canadian astronaut Hadfield played guitar on the ISS, I don't know whether he was the first. I assume the cassette players on Apollo don't count.
    2
  50.  @slckb0y65  Because old integrated circuits didn't have components as small as modern ones, and thus weren't as susceptible to radiation.
    2
  51.  @slckb0y65  Care to explain why they're worrying about it if SpaceX is fake?
    2
  52.  @spacedriver24  The point is it wasn't SpaceX that caused the dual hiatus in manned space flight and the lack of proper focus on the industrial development of space. It's just SpaceX that's fixing it.
    2
  53. Have they marked the 20 mile limit? (couldn't resist)
    2
  54.  @preestonblairr7361  When you appear to advocate with perfect seriousness that which others have advocated with perfect seriousness, you should not be offended by being thought serious. Moon hoaxers might be laughable in a sense, but simply repeating their mantra does not qualify as a joke. In a joke, something in what is said or written must evoke irony, paradox, a play on words or something of the sort.
    2
  55.  @antiHUMANDesigns  Vacuum does not make every weapon a sniper weapon. Much of the limitation in ACCURACY would carry over. Projectiles from rifled weapons do not diverge much from their initial trajectory due to aerodynamic effects, except for air resistance slowing them down. The "spread", the divergence of a series of identical rounds fired from the same weapon immobilized in a vice, is present in the precise vector of the bullet from the barrel, with more accurate weapons manifesting less divergence, and the same degree or fraction of degree divergence resulting in an absolute size of a group of bullet holes on a target being directly proportional to range to target, as one would expect. One interesting consequence of firing in a vacuum, is that projectiles from smoothbore weapons, such as a percussion cap muzzle loading musket firing lead ball ammo, WOULD NOT experience the "curve ball" effect such weapons exhibit in an atmosphere which cause the bullets to diverge more degrees from the aim point the farther downrange they fly through the air. This might result in such weapons being surprisingly accurate under those conditions. Range limitations in games are a digital representation of the decreasing probability of hitting the same size of target at increasing range even under firing bench conditions, much less field conditions. In RL, when the "range" of such weapons is listed, it is usually a reference to accuracy, not the bullet losing killing potency to speed lost to air drag. Usually, a bullet is still dangerous IF IT HITS, at a range far in excess of the nominal range of the weapon. It's just not that likely to hit.
    1
  56.  @antiHUMANDesigns  I'm sorry to irritate you, but accuracy is nominally and practically the limiting factor and ignoring it would not INCREASE the realism of a battle sim, as you seem to believe.
    1
  57.  @antiHUMANDesigns  My post was responding to this: "In most space shooter games, ballistic weapons have a range limit, and it doesn't make sense." and: "in space all weapons would effectively be sniper weapons" If you define "lethal range" in the IRRELEVANT way you just did in your last post, it has nothing to do with your complaint about the "realism" of space shooter games. If that is "lethal range" then: 1. "lethal range" has no significance in combat, it is just a "shooting range safety" factor. and consequently 2. "lethal range" has no place in a combat sim.
    1
  58. I suppose that, like aircraft, it depends on the wind. You land INTO the wind to minimize ground speed at your stall wind speed. Also it is effectively like lengthening the runway.
    1
  59. No, if you take the bullet off a revolver cartridge and pour out the propellant, then shove the brass into wax, place this "round" in a revolver and fire it, just the primer will shoot your wax "bullet" at a considerable speed and short range accuracy. Some folks use this trick for indoor target practice. Even if gas pressure were necessary for ignition the primer momentarily provides several times sea-level gas pressure within the cartridge. And gas pressure IS NOT relevant to the ignition of solid propellant. The primer vaporizes a small portion of the fuel and oxidizer which soon react in the heat, vaporizing more, etc. This creates a great deal of gas pressure that propells the bullet. I presume Cody's experiment relies on gaseous oxidizer, which the vacuum pump pumps out. Liquid oxidizers boil to gas in a vacuum.
    1
  60.  @agsystems8220  "Cody's experiment did not rely on gaseous oxidiser, and even things like gunpowder were found not to burn." Thanks, I have watched several of Cody's vacuum chamber experiments, I did not remember that. "they are well enough sealed that you might as well consider it perfect." The gripping hand is that there is utterly insufficient TIME for pressure to be drawn off the process through any small gaps that may be present before the bullet leaves the barrel.
    1
  61.  @matsv201  For an orbit that is supposed to go DIRECTLY over the poles, unless launched over a pole it has an eastward velocity component which must be counteracted by the rocket to place the payload in the right orbital plane. The closer to the nearest pole, the smaller the bad velocity component. That is why further north is better for Sweden (and further south would be better for Tasmania) for polar orbit launches. It has nothing to do with gravity.
    1
  62. Don't forget your insulating gloves, if you touch anything you'll flash freeze your digits. I think on Titan you could have a blimp where the lifting gas is a breathable mixture of oxygen and neon (or even maybe oxygen and nitrogen) at room temperature.
    1
  63. For strict values of "impossible" and loose values of "something", you would have to strain the habitability in order to completely shut down space accessibility. Staging is a thing. In another vid, Scott Manley used realism mode and made the "Earth" twice as big. Using STS Solid Rocket Boosters (several) to supplement a Saturn V stack, he managed to get a Gemini capsule into orbit around the super-earth. Higher planetary orbital speed and escape velocity (which increase with planetary size) determine the cost/benefit practicality of space missions. I think the vid I referenced is recent, check out his page for a Manley answer.
    1
  64. gold
    1
  65. The problem with ethanol as fuel is that you have to mix it with gasoline to make it compatible with installed hardware. You have to get ethanol 99% pure to mix it with gasoline, which doesn't mix with water. But 90% ethanol 10% water burns just fine, if you design the engine to burn it. 99% ethanol takes ten times as much energy and is ten times more expensive per unit volume than 90/10.
    1
  66. The proceeds are from the sale of the music CD. Nobody is claiming the mission itself was a fundraiser for St. Jude's. I don't understand what you're objecting to. If you want to fund an African hospital, fund an African hospital. Somebody else's generosity and thoughtfulness is none of your business, Judas. Everything Musk is involved in has a "save the world" angle from his viewpoint. This is not a safe and efficient way to make money. When you contribute as much to the world, you'll have standing to criticize Musk and the sponsor of this mission (who isn't Musk), as well as something better to do. Pardon me if I don't hold my breath until that happens.
    1
  67. Both the Apollo Command Module AND Dragon have each a "top" or "front" hatch that opens inward and a "side" hatch that opens outward. The former is used when docking. The latter "side" hatch is used for crew ingress at the launch tower and it's the one Scott Manley's buddy used to get into the craft to take the picture.
    1
  68. ​ @jnawk83  The reason for the side hatch opening outward is "Apollo 1". A fire ignited in the Apollo Command Module during a launch pad test when the capsule was pressurized to 1.3 atmospheres pure oxygen. All three astronauts were incinerated inside the capsule. Nobody could open the hatch during the fire because the elevated pressure inside plus the extra pressure from the heat of the fire held the hatch shut. Since that time, the side hatch on subsequent capsules has always opened outwards in case of an emergency. The side hatch has never been used when a capsule was in vacuum, but if astronauts (or anything else) ever needs to be retrieved from a capsule when the capsule for any reason can't be depressurized before opening the hatch, the side hatch would be the only way to access the interior. Likewise if the astronauts can't depressurize the interior when the pressure happens to be significantly higher inside, the side hatch is the only way the astronauts could get out.
    1
  69. On the plus side, it does not require unobtanium, on the minus side, it has to be LONGER than a Earth to GSO elevator to work (LI & L2 are farther from the Moon than GSO is from the equator.) So, possible, but non-trivial. Rotorvators are easier for both bodies.
    1
  70.  @zacklewis342  "you've created a false alternate history that pre-supposes no action would have been taken to remedy the situation." No, he's reminding us of actual history where nothing was done to remedy the situation. He's reminding us of a historical failure mode. There have been 2 major hiatuses in NASA manned orbital access capability. Between the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, and the first Shuttle flight, and between the last Shuttle flight and Crew Dragon 1. Don't tell us it can't happen. It HAS HAPPENED. Now, it MAY NOT, but his cautionary reminder is well taken.
    1
  71.  @mr.d.rektorstudios  We're paying half the price and the money stays in the US. Glad you appreciate that.
    1
  72.    "There is also the little matter of the majority of humans being transported to & from ISS on Soyuz. " That couldn't have been a design consideration, because it was not known beforehand that this would be the case. "Roscosmos should finally be launching the heavy Nauka module to the ISS on Proton in 2021." Awsome!
    1
  73. That must be the orbit insertion burn shown.
    1
  74.  @1.5acrefarmer42  "I’ll go find the weather data and prove 100% that’s fake." You'll do nothing of the sort, and you don't have to go up in space to see the Starlink sats, you can see them from Earth. We're a lot closer to those we can see than they were to any.
    1
  75. The internal panels weren't made of wood.
    1
  76.  @railworksamerica  I flamed because that is a common complaint of spaceflight deniers. If I hit the wrong target, I apologize. They're everywhere online. (But seemingly nowhere else, go figure)
    1
  77.  @awebuser5914  The original post did not mention "cold".
    1
  78. You mention the possibility of creating H2, O2 from locally mined water. That would be ideal, but just replenishing the Oxygen liberated from rocks would save the majority of the weight of the propellant combination.
    1
  79. That is the eventual idea. Yes, spending a month in an Apollo/Orion can is inhumane and absurd.
    1
  80. @IM GRAY If we have the resources of solar systems we don't need their minerals, or the hassle of fending off natives or pulling stuff out of their bigger gravity well.
    1
  81.  @thesnitch7  type "deep thro" in a search engine and click on the autocomplete, if you really want to know (you don't).
    1
  82. Dude, he's sired a buss load of kids. It's not like he has to pay for it.
    1
  83. Absurd, they let the slander stand, and hide my reply?
    1
  84. They need to heat the water with a ground based maser or laser, not a new idea, but one that has a chance of working.
    1
  85.  @rickharper4533  "hair spray is flammable" The stream of almost any modern spray can is flammable, since manufacturers were required by law to replace inert CFCs with FLAMMABLE METHANE.
    1
  86. "the only reason they became more popular is because of higher energy density right off the bat." That is why they are useful for first stage boosters, that IS the point. The problem with a super-Earth is not maneuvering once in orbit, it is getting to orbit in the first place.
    1
  87. "five is right out"
    1
  88. Speaking of Buzz Aldrin and food, He carried a specialized communion set in his personal mass allowance, and the first meal eaten on the Moon was communion.
    1
  89. Current Nasa operational suits don't have the shoulder turning joint or the wrist turning joint. NASA developed it, but they haven't flown it yet.
    1
  90.  @phuzz00  That could have been spun as a "realistic test".
    1
  91. "They weren't networked." It's called sneakernet. 1970s distributed networking protocol.
    1
  92. The first orbital mission of the Shuttle was in 1981. Reagan's first term started in January 1981. Reagan was not around to change things "mid build". Who told you that lie?
    1
  93.  @Marcus51090  Google is a powerful search engine, but it does not have the power to warp time.
    1
  94. At the right temperature, cheese is sticky.
    1
  95. Incredible that this guy who knows his stuff gets worthless guff from those who don't.
    1
  96. Most of the people who don't regard the West as the good guys brutally oppress their citizens. The existence of a better alternative is an existential threat to their way of death.
    1
  97. Go back to selling rides to billionaires.
    1
  98. That is actually the part of the movie that (sort of) makes sense. It is not enough to get where the asteroid is at the right time. You need to match speeds with it to land. The lowest delta-v way to do that is to do something similar to an Apollo 13 style free return hyperbola around the Moon so you're going the same direction as the asteroid, THEN match speeds (provided you have enough time and the Moon is in the right place). Also, obviously the US shuttle and the Russian space station were obviously more advanced (then-near-future) models than the ones actually orbiting above the theaters.
    1
  99. With slightly more excuse, particularly since their atmosphere might be thicker with more distortion, perhaps translucent where there is no, or almost no, naked eye astronomy (or sun/star/primary only naked eye astronomy). If they need radio or infrared astronomy to image their moons or other planets in their Solar System, it would be somewhat more plausible for the average Joe to conclude, "It's all fake".
    1
  100. @Mew2Prince Presumably few Austrialian students are flat earthers. They can see the southern cross.
    1
  101. He said it does not save delta-v for the rendesvous, but it saves having to boost a habitat with you every trip.
    1
  102. That's about the neutral position in free fall. Trying to hold the arm down (in microgravity WITHOUT a spacesuit) requires a little exertion.
    1
  103. Wow, I thought of "Brunch" as before noon.
    1
  104. The moon landing was in June. Woodstock was in August. Woodstock was not televised live.
    1
  105. Clean room coverage to keep the interior clean. NASA used white.
    1
  106.  @kiereluurs1243  I'm not sure they make English sky walkers.
    1
  107. The "9mm" pistol in question is probably the military standard 9mm Makarov auto, using a much more weak cartridge than the more familiar (at least in the West) 9mm Parabellum cartridge used by the German Luger and the British Hi-Power. The Makarov is not considered by US firearms experts to be a reliable man stopper, much less a protection against large predators.
    1
  108. Spacefaring nations call it "math".
    1
  109. Automatic self-canceling sour grapes, I was at work AND it was overcast.
    1
  110. Why would you assume that? Do you think all space photos are fake? Or are you just a Musk hater? You have no objective REASON to suppose any photos of the Earth are Photoshopped, you only have a MOTIVE to ASSERT they are. And we have had photos of the Earth since the dawn of the space age in the 1950s. Photo Shop did not exist in the '50s. The original version came out in 1988, long after the Apollo program was over in the late 70s. Before the 80s there were no computers capable of remotely significant digital image processing and we didn't have photorealistic CGI until the 90s. When the famous "Earthrise" photo taken by Apollo 8 was released in 1967, the technology to fake it did not exist.
    1
  111. Brilliant, Elon has figured out how to keep all the stupid and wicked folk out of his Mars city.
    1
  112.  @executivesteps  Cooling requires active systems and has nothing to do with the suits themselves.
    1
  113. Watch the vid. It explains that.
    1
  114. Temperature control is the job of the life support system, not the suit.
    1
  115. One short of a gross, which I suppose makes sense.
    1
  116. With a subwoofer.!
    1
  117.  @wonjez3982  No, you're thinking of "conduction". "Convection" always means the motion of a fluid in an acceleration frame (usually gravity) due to temperature related density differences, (hot air rising, cool air falling and that sort of thing).
    1
  118.  @hedgehog3180  The most severe projections of climate change consequences BY SCIENTISTS (as opposed to those by politicians and clickbait hacks) are far short of "mass extinction".
    1
  119. What have you got against your mother?
    1
  120.  @larry785  Not recently.
    1
  121. I have my late Grandma's and a board holding up my computer monitor/TV.
    1
  122.  @DanielTsosie  Salvage, buddy, metal and parts in orbit where it is expensive to put metal and parts. Think of it as ISRO for Earth orbit.
    1
  123. What do the two have to do with one another?
    1
  124. Well, it could prevent the oxidation if it wasn't roasted in oxygen, but you could do that under nitrogen on Earth
    1
  125.  @GlutenEruption  That is the diametric opposite of the truth. Government R&D on TECH nowadays is finding military and surveilance applications for civilian developed tech. The government funds basic scientific research, but it's corporate R&D that translates physics, biology, and other basic science into products we can use. The Apollo program with its gargantuan budgets and motivated whiz kids actually produced some spin-offs, but that was an anomaly. Theranos and FTX didn't cost the taxpayer a dime. But we DID pay for government research like crustaceans on treadmills, the robo squirrel, and the turtle tunnel. That investors get to chose projects they voluntarily want to advance and which costs them something if they flop is both morally superior and more practical and beneficial.
    1
  126. swallow or yawn. It opens the eustachian tube. The same way everybody does on a airliner.
    1
  127.  @donjones4719  The rub is that the FIRST pass has to slow you down from transfer velocity to some sort of orbit, however eccentric, otherwise you never encounter the atmosphere again. After that you can take your time.
    1
  128.  @jackvernian7779  Yes, that's the rub.
    1
  129.  @jackvernian7779  No, thank you. I'm always nailing down ambiguity in others, I hate it when I am ambiguous myself.
    1
  130.  @TheEvilmooseofdoom  Yes, but I bet you would be willing to do it for less!
    1
  131. I don't know what you're talking about. All the older EVA suits (as opposed to the flight suits with a different specification) look a lot stiffer and puffier under vacuum, like Michelin Man, and they don't have those circular slide joints at the shoulder and wrist like these (NASA developed the joints, but hasn't flown them yet). Have you ever watched EVA footage before?
    1
  132.  @donjones4719  Gemini missions were shorter. I think they only had a "relief tube" (as demonstrated in the "Apollo 13" movie), not any full facilities for elimination other than the diapers.
    1
  133.  @donjones4719  Thanks.
    1
  134. Beacause that's the neutral position in free fall. You have to push it down to get it down. You are evaluating the position like he was vertical in gravity and something had to hold his arm up. You sometimes see folk on the ISS posing in the "standing" position for photographs. It takes extra effort to maintain that pose in free fall.
    1
  135. I suppose that depends on the billionaire, eh? He may be the first to test new gear in space, but he's not the first billionaire to test new gear on himself.
    1
  136. Benzine is the chemical in gasoline/petrol. Gasoline (in the US) is benzine processed for use as a motor fuel. Your last post implied that benzine is something different from gasoline/petrol.
    1
  137. Extremely fast rotational speed (if they are lucky enough to have a short day) could compensate for higher planetary mass, especially for low equatorial orbit insertion. Then they cold do orbital maneuvering at their leisure with low-thrust, high specific impulse propulsion like ion drives, and the like.
    1
  138. +Shaden0040 Possible, but the ground rules of this thought experiment ASSUME otherwise. This goes without saying. Your speculation is, in other words, off topic.
    1
  139.  @executivesteps  The cooling is the job of the life support system, not the suit.
    1
  140.  @scottmanley  That liberal was an anti-communist who passed tax cuts. He would not be allowed to run as a Democrat today, the party wouldn't have it.
    1
  141. I assume you are talking about the Space Shuttle. The SRBs didn't have to go as high or as fast so, recovery was easier. The main tank goes nearly all the way into orbit, so it would need the same level of reentry protection as the orbiter to recover by reentry, and it's not that elaborate or expensive compared to the other components, just a tank with some insulation. The mass budget would have been prohibitive, and it would not have been cost effective. There was some talk of using the tank IN ORBIT. Basically, Skylab was an oversized Agena upper stage with the fuel tank reused as living area. A single main tank fitted out in a similar manner to be a component of the ISS would more than double the living space of the station.
    1
  142. Fully extend all legs, partly pull them up for balance. The Apollo program was worried about the legs sinking in. Didn't happen at all. So long as the "feet" of the landing legs have a certain area in proportion to the weight each leg supports, it won't sink, as experimentally confirmed. Consult Apollo data for the ratio.
    1
  143. Brilliant! Elon has figured out how to keep the assholes out of Mars city.
    1
  144. In other words, you're hoping and hinting for regulatory obstruction.
    1
  145. What he's trying to do with elections is free up speech and avoid the 2020 election interference where the FBI asked social media to suppress the Hunter laptop story. The Twitter files document administration requests to suppress certain stories and sources. In the case of the laptop story claiming it was "Russian disinformation". "Requests" shortly after they had hauled Zuck and others into a hearing to publicly threaten them with antitrust action if they didn't censor more. What the Twitter Files haven't exposed, Zuck is now testifying to. Perhaps if you agree with the bias of the censors, you feel no need to curtail it. I suppose you're too young to remember the notion of "I disagree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it." A few years ago, when the government involvement in the censorship was still secret and we were complaining about it, your tune was "First Amendment doesn't apply-private company!!" Now you've changed your tune and a private company is criminal because it doesn't censor when you want it to.
    1
  146.  @noname117spore  thanks
    1
  147.  @rbrtck  thanks
    1
  148. Actually, it's nowhere too early to TALK about it.
    1
  149.  @williamarmstrong7199  If such a thing had happened in 2008 it WOULD have been charity, then. Nobody in 2008 expected Trump to be a serious contender for president then. Therefore it didn't happen. The lending choices were made on business considerations, because Trump was not a political figure.
    1
  150. Too late, somebody already got to the Moon in a decade.
    1
  151. They are in spacesuits. They would get the hatch as far closed as they could get it and reenter in the capsule. I'm sure that's a planned abort mode.
    1
  152. Yea, it doesn't look formal enough for a classical style concert.
    1
  153.  @christofl6523  Further proof that these frequencies pass through the atmosphere is that have been and still can be beamed toward the Moon and a signal bounced off it, with the proper 2 to 3 second light speed delay. Under some conditions, satellites are visible in the night sky.
    1
  154.  @christofl6523  "there was no delay when the astronauts on the moon were talking to NASA back on Earth." Of course, there was. "The only people who still believe in the moon landing" are everybody except a few kook fringe conspiracy theorists. You sound like you think that yours is the majority view. Every piece of "evidence" you present in a public forum is debunked immediately, but you still pretend to have a point. You just made a counterfactual assertion about the com delay, for instance. Any conspiracy theory which requires that ALL THE EYEWITNESSES ARE LYING is BUNK! It flies in the face of human nature, and turns the ordinary rules of evidence on their head. In real life 3 can keep a secret when 2 are dead.
    1
  155. Well, we're supposed to have someone looking now. NASA JPL Center for Near Earth Object Studies, if no one else.
    1
  156.  @TheEvilmooseofdoom  We'll see.
    1
  157.  @entropyachieved750  Your political views have to be the source of your QC nonsense. SpaceX has an unparalleled safety record.
    1
  158. This is what has to happen if we are to expand into space. There must be profit pulling as well as capitol pushing, or it will never happen. I realized this 50+ years ago, when I was a kid.
    1
  159. "Only 2 major moons - Mimas and Iapetus - offer anything other than a near perfect edge on view of the rings." That's why I took that picture from a minor moon.
    1
  160. Some day you will work as hard on something great and understand. On second thought, never mind.
    1
  161. I didn't notice on the vid. Were they using the personal devices when the capsule was depressurized? When pressurized, there would be "air" around the devices. Only the warmed air wouldn't convectively "rise" to make room for cooler air, unless by cabin fans or astronaut motion.
    1
  162. I am more interested in using them as a material feedstock for orbital industry.
    1
  163. I'm pretty sure there are rules against it, and it could cause a fluid hazard in free fall. In low-g sections of a space or Moon hotel, might be a selling point.
    1
  164. Those were flight suits, not EVA suits. Different specification.
    1
  165. It may have been. When Apollo astronauts did an EVA to retrieve film canisters from the Service Module, they used the Lunar Module as an airlock, and they only had 3 anyway. The Mercury program depressurized the capsule for the spacewalk, but only had a crew of 2, same as the corresponding Soviet missions. I know they've had 2 astronauts out on some ISS spacewalks, and some Shuttle missions, but I don't know about 3. The typical Space Shuttle mission had a crew of 5, some more, some less, but they never did an EVA without an airlock. So 4 may well be a record.
    1
  166. Guys, it's rotating skyhook for the win.
    1
  167. Beggars can't be chosers. I don't like Apple either, but I don't think that gives me the standing to complain about SM's vid.
    1
  168. The most notable aspect of that voyage was its fatal failure. An aspect notably lacking from Polaris Dawn. The Starliner mission is closer, but not really because nobody died.
    1
  169. This gives me some notion of the synchronization and navigational precision tech which would be needed for "stellasers" and long baseline optical interferometry. In fact these other applications may have to include the gravity telescope as a subsystem to compensate for gravity wave interference over long baselines.
    1
  170.  @AG-ig8uf  Contracts only. SpaceX has garnered 80% of the launch market, government AND commercial, by underselling the competition and they still make bank because they can reuse the boosters and nobody else can. Boeing gets the cost plus contracts, and gets more government money than SpaceX. They got more than twice as much for failing with Starliner than SpaceX got for delivering with Dragon. Launch contracts, development contracts for Dragon, Lunar Starship, and in orbit refueling. That's it. Tesla has been excluded from all incentive programs for electric vehicles since the Biden administration. Ford gets it, GM gets it, Tesla doesn't.
    1
  171. Why wouldn't it be good? If you mean someday somebody's going to get killed, you're a little late with the warning: Astronaut and Cosmonaut fatalities during spaceflight: 18 Astronaut and Cosmonaut fatalities during training and equipment testing: 13 Non-Astronaut/Cosmonaut fatalities associated with spaceflight: Fatalities caused by rocket explosions: 196 Other non-astronaut/cosmonaut fatalities: 28 Caveats: 1. This includes all nations space programs, not just US and USSR/Russia. 2. The non-astronaut figures include deaths associated with unmanned space missions. 3. The USSR and China figures are the respective government figures, and frankly, communist governments lie a lot. The figures are probably higher for their incidents (in some cases there is independent evidence of this), and some incidents probably were not reported. 4. Not included are accidents or incidents associated with intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) tests, unmanned space flights not resulting in fatality or serious injury, or Soviet or German rocket-powered aircraft projects of World War II. Also not included are alleged unreported Soviet space accidents Accidents, including fatalities, have always been associated with: 1. construction. 2. transportation. 3. industrial activity 4. exploration. 5. cutting edge technological programs and of course, 6. space travel, which incorporates all of the above. We're going. Our voluntary risks are none of your business.
    1
  172.  @andret4403  No sweat, I compiled that a few years ago and saved the text. The original had links, but nowadays a lot of channels set their comment section to autodelete links, so I left them out. I wish they wouldn't do that. I had a hunch the subject would come up again.
    1
  173. They had a privacy screen. Probably more modest than an American restroom stall.
    1
  174.  @G.Crispin  But the noise and the smell aren't that gender-specific.
    1
  175. For heaven's sake, I thought that was the literal color of the proplellant.
    1
  176. If that interior shot with the wandering stylus was showing the acceleration due to the deorbit burn, then it must have been thrusting out the front of the ship, and the turned the heat shield around afterward, because the stylus was wandering "up" with respect to the camera and the seats.
    1
  177. Fair in what sense? Musk having political opinions isn't worth NASA and the Defense Department spend 5 times as much for launch capability. Filtering government contracts on the basis of political opinions is an excellent definition of unfair, but a better term would be administrative malfeasance and abuse of power.
    1
  178. Sally Ride was no slouch.
    1
  179.  @petebike  Feel free, this channel is not for those who don't believe in truth.
    1
  180.  @monkeyhanger975  Why would you assume he hates the Bible? Or did you mean "Bible thumper"?
    1
  181. After all the Musk hate on this page, it's refreshing to see somebody who has the confidence in Musk to trust him to make a soundstage in space safe.
    1
  182. Anakin do better than that.
    1
  183. It depends on your terminology. I've never heard the life support pack as being considered part of the suit.
    1
  184. We'd rather you test a spacesuit. At least if we have to watch.
    1
  185. Yeah, I think it's bigger than Apollo and smaller than Orion.
    1
  186.  @libertyresearch-iu4fy  A register is a section of the CPU where something can be stored, Some CPU instructions assume the parameter has been loaded into a register. A memory location refers to a place in memory (ROM, RAM, EPROM, whatever sort) which can be read or written to by the CPU through the system data/address bus indexed by a digital "address". Registers "remember" things, so you might be tempted to call it "memory", but in computer nomenclature the system memory is a different thing from the register. It's internal to the CPU and doesn't have an "address".
    1
  187. Yes, the mission title is a portmandeu of "Apollo" and "a capella"
    1
  188.  @ohasis8331  Nothing new, I'll warrant.
    1