Comments by "Diana Pennepacker" (@dianapennepacker6854) on "Scott Manley" channel.

Yeah, but at the same time I understand NASA. Their funding is limiting. If it means save Hubble versus something better I can't understand them letting it decay. Remember to vote! Make your voices heard.
13
It is literally this probe, and similar things like that made me think we had super heat resistant materials. Till recently. I am near 40! I thought we for sure had a material that can withstand 10k Celsius. No! Halfnium Carbide cannot withstand anything more than 4.3k. Celsius. That is all we have! That is pathetic! Outside of the mystery material "starlite" apparently being able to withstand 10k Celsius. I could not find anything more. Not even any therotical nano materials. (Gotta be something for passive cooling). Anyway it was kind of depressing to know we are so limited.
5
@FireCrack The fact it landed while really important parts were disintegrating was an amazing feat of software, and hardware (joints) engineering. That must have been terrible for the flight system to handle. The fact so much disintegrated, and read in comments hardware failures is concerning. I don't buy that it was planned. They've got a lot to go. It was insane it had a live feed.
5
@angrydoggy9170 It is supposed to be cheaper due to economy of scale to use Starship. Well that is what Musk says. Will it? Truthfully I don't know rocket economics. Will it be turning around every day? Ha, not if half of it disintergrated on the way back down. That feat I think is far away. Also people make satellites to fit rockets. A lot of satellites will be able to take advantage of the sheer size which will be awesome as I heard some ideas require a rocket with a bigger diameter which it has. Let us hope after they finish this design they work on an even bigger rocket or work on bigger versions of the Raptors. Tesla and Space X likes robots, but they should invest in 3d printing too! 3D printing can allow so much that I'm surprised they aren't going heavy into it. Supposed to make the parts dirt cheap, but designing them isn't. I suspect due to 3d printing limitations have to be kept in mind.
5
Yeah my first thought. Where is the heat going? The radiators would have to be massive. MS with the server under water had a better idea. At least you can service it by bringing it up. I am sure they had plenty of issues, but literally zero are unsurmountable, and working against physics in space. I really think stuff like this is more about laundering money.
4
What do you mean so expensive for most missions? We don't have anything better? The statement for most missions is throwing me off. Isnt TDRSS the pronoun of a satellite or is it a type of satellite? That satellite is cool, and all. Yet it is about rhe most hideous thing we've put in space. Reminds me of Star Wars Fan Art. The animation showing the antenna reminded me of some crippled fetus monstrosity spreading its little clawed arms ready to devour the next planet. It is really insane how far we've come. From computer power to just how much we take these satelites for granted in our daily lives.
4
@frosty9595 Okay at first I didn't agree with him saying you all are delusional. Maybe you guys are. Those fins failing like that along with the hardware failures wasn't planned, and shouldn't have happened. Starship is supposed to be reusable. Sort of hard to be reusable when half your ship is incinerated, and important parts being vaporized made it nearly a critical failure. I think Musk like usual is pulling your legs. He didn't mention the flaps and hardware would probably do that. Now with all that said. It is quite amazing that with everything literally failing the thing still did a soft touch. The team behind the software flying these things is second to none. I can't even imagine the impact on aerodynamics with it disintegrating. Hopefully 5 will be much better.
3
@enoughofthis Nah man having a landing pad drone ship costs literal thousands per day for the permission for a dock. You need support ships too. I saw it in a video on an other company with Everyday Astronaut talking about the cost of drone ships. I think it was like 25k a day minimum for everything or something that adds up. Possibly more. I remember being like WTF. Anyone know how much it was? Upset I cannot remember what video.
2
Whoa that is awesome, and interesting. I wonder what speeds they were getting. Is that essentially some type of gas gun, but with gun powder? We just need more powerful chemicals somehow damn it. Why is physics so limiting. Think modern gun powder is about 5.5k feet per second or 1,700m/s. Come on. Know the names of the projects?
2
That is what I said in an other thread. Holy hell. Half the ship seemed like it was at critical failure, vaporizing, and it still managed to pull it off. Legends! Whatever program is running that is worth billions I think. With that said. People need to stop saying every failure here shown was planned or expected. Some people are in denial. There are valid criticisms. And with that said. Bravo! That was amazing none the less. PS. You'd think we would have alloys, and materials that can easily withstand those temps by now.
1
I wonder how much the flight software is worth. That seems to me like their greatest acheivement. The previous launch (4?) was the most insane as flight surfaces were falling apart. Literally vaporizing. Yet it still somehow managed to land where it needed to be with broken parts. Simply unbeleivable. IIRC someone said one of the flight computers broke too. After I saw that I knew they'd get it weather permitting.
1
@eruiluvatar236 Your post reminded me of a post I saw on Reddit while trying to find the best material. Came across someone asking about Starlite. How we could recreate it. Something like that. This guy on AskScience said something like. "My toast can do the same thing" It really made me laugh. Especially due to the poster acting like it was some space age material with a conspiracy behind it. I did find a study from Illinois. Maybe Ohio? Same place ; ) but they said they had a break through where they could control where the heat went while using magnets. Pretty interesting, but still not passive heat resistant! I am truly surprised there aren't any therotical materials that maybe one day with nano science we maybe able to create either. Halfnium Carbonate seems to be it. Sci Fi and NASA had me trippin/stupid not realizing how limited we are! (We don't even smelt tungsten at scale.)
1
I don't know what you mean. You act like it wasn't a big deal anytime NASA had a failure decades ago. Rocket failings have always been big news!
1
I wonder if you worked with my grandpa. He worked in around Lockheed, and maybe Douglas, and the nuclear industry. I think as an inspector or saftey in both. He didn't talk about it much at all sadly. I do know he, and people thought the engines were for a cruise missile. Couldn't beleive they'd attach a man to it let alone two. God I wish I actually learnt things from him!
1
And chemistry. Space X... Just had huge portions of their BFG disintegrate... Feel like out of all things that would be the easier one to design against since we've been successful with materials to withstand standard reentry for a long time now. People say it is due to their fast iteration, and I get that. Yet Jesus. My confidence is waining with that, and the hardware failures. Yet it was a successful failure for sure as it still landed. The programmers for the flight controls are on an other level. Mad props for that team in particular, and Space X for getting things done.
1
@quantumblur_3145 You're supposed to capitalize your sentences at the beginning, and add a period at the end. Don't talk about a typo when you can't even write a sentence. Also I didn't even say it should be pretty.
1
@quantumblur_3145 It is called spell check. When you type the letters it automatically does it on my keyboard anyway. You're a daft one, aren't ya? Maybe a little salty about me insulting the looks of the space craft. Yet you're a good little boy. Capitalizing your letters now, after looking dumb. Good job. Oh! Since we are on grammar. You're also supposed to put a coma after using quotations. Tsk tsk little one! Maybe you should focus on your own writing before calling someone out on an easy typo that is incredibly common. Or stop being petty.
1