Indeed.
I assumed the comment was satirising one common form of misguided critique of SpaceX's "hardware-rich" approach to this development programme. But yes, now I'm not so sure.
Indeed.
I assumed the comment was satirising one common form of misguided critique of SpaceX's "hardware-rich" approach to this development programme. But yes, now I'm not so sure.
Groaning:
And of course, some of us contain multitudes ...
Until now I've been too lazy to look into what rules/guidelines exist for this community. Am I now right in thinking there aren't any? (If so, I'm not complaining!) Or am I just not finding them (as an inexperienced Lemmy user)?
The thing I was going to look into was any posting guidelines. How significant should something be to warrant its own post? For example, this tweet includes a video with an F9 barge landing perspective that I don't remember seeing before.
FWIW, my own feeling is that I'd like a quarterly "General Discussion Thread" (as with the equivalent Subreddit), to gather up all the minor stuff.
Are posts automatically 'published' or do they go through moderation first? (If this is something I should be able to determine myself, if I knew more about Lemmy, LMK and I'll go & do some reading!)
P.S. My thanks to you and all the team for all your efforts.
I'm a rocket ship on my way to Mars [in a sense]
I'm burnin' through the sky, yeah [over Namibia, at about ~3:43:11 for about a minute]
LMK if you find anything interesting! My guess is that if there is any melting & re-solidifying going on, it will be nothing larger than a droplet.
Dan Huot jinxed it by invoking Kubrick on the livestream. It was subsequently inevitable that SpaceX's hardware abstraction layer (HAL) would claim not to be able to do it. I just hope it was telling the truth.
HAL: I'm sorry, Dan. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Dan: What's the problem?
HAL: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.
Dan: What are you talking about, HAL?
HAL: It's right there on your screen Dan, the actuators are stuck.
Dan: Oh yeah. Anyway, do you know any songs? You might want to start singing in about 27 minutes.
Make a good reef.
Hope so!
Though I believe that it was the Gulf of Mexico that received (large chunks of) B14.
Whereas the Indian Ocean has probably some small bits of S35 debris. (Unless it fully vapourised on re-entry? You've also got me wondering whether any of the materials merely melt, and then re-solidify as solid lumps, either in the lower atmosphere or after hitting the ocean.)
And while I'm being pedantic, @threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works, the table above says "Soft water landing" for the booster, which isn't how I'd describe the plan they had for it.
Where do you get the information from that he deleted videos?
Well here's one example of the accusation ("deleted videos where he said spacex would never be able to re-fly a 1st stage"). Two replies seem to endorse it (e.g. "I recall him saying something like that") and another seems to be fairly familiar with his output and to endorse the general point ("later tried to delete and cover up"). One of the replies links to a different video, which I haven't looked at.
Note that the first ever booster re-use was around March 2017 so we're probably talking about a deletion that happened no later than April 2017. And I'd expect he'd not be so stupid as to wait that long; he'd have probably deleted any such videos as soon as SpaceX announced that they'd found a willing customer (and insurance company), at the latest. So probably by late 2016 or early 2017.
Other stuff I just found ...
Seems he had some argument with another unreliable You Tube 'personality' called Sargon who made a response video back in May 2017. That video is unavailable now but apparently it was still available in 2022 and convinced one person who had until then been unconvinced, that Thunder Foot "apparently just made up shit about someone which was completely false".
I've just looked at one of his more recent "BUSTED!!" videos (July 2021, about Starlink) and I didn't notice any outright falsehoods, so perhaps he's being more circumspect these days. Also, he hasn't deleted that one, even though it's pretty embarrassing for him. So credit where it's due.
That said, the simplest example I've come across of an apparently uncorrected falsehood from him is also from 2021: https://x.com/thunderf00t/status/1364020482572492801 It's hardly a big deal, but he clearly knew that his followers believed the claim to be false, so it seems that at best he was lazy in not bothering to go back and read the 3 replies that proved they were correct.
Some general "debunkings" of more of his SpaceX claims:
https://old.reddit.com/r/thunderf00t/comments/lthowt/some_fundamental_errors_in_thunderf00ts_spacex/ and https://old.reddit.com/r/thunderf00t/comments/lu6evm/a_more_casual_fact_check_on_thunderf00ts_spacex/
The capsule landed pretty close to the booster!: https://youtu.be/JH4_bghcTjg?t=41m15s (41:15)
I'm guessing this is not supposed to happen?
Either way, I wonder how close the capsule would have to be before it would have led to a significant delay in the passengers being allowed to exit. Ground crew having to maintain their distance until booster 'safing' was complete, etc.