Recent Posts

41

Engineering / Re: COMMODORE® 64x

« Last post by Sirgod on June 30, 2025, 05:30:49 pm »

very nice

42

Engineering / Re: COMMODORE® 64x

« Last post by Nemesis on June 30, 2025, 02:24:09 pm »

Two videos that Commodore fans will likely find interesting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN8r4LRcOXc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke-Ao-CpI7E

I'm watching the 2nd video now.

43

Engineering / Re: Denisovan Genome decoded.

« Last post by Nemesis on June 22, 2025, 09:18:53 pm »

The skull known as "Dragon Man" has had genetic sequencing identifying it as Denisovan.  It is unclear whether this will make them Homo Denisovan or Homo Longi the name ascribed to the skull previously.

44

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on June 19, 2025, 07:39:22 am »

IFT 10 will be delayed.

Starship 36 had an "incident" during a static fire.  Something burst higher up (the line down from the header tanks may have burst) followed by an explosion.  Starship 36 was destroyed.  No personnel injuries (and everyone accounted for).  Damage likely to the test stand. 

Unless something went wrong in the filling procedure and over pressured the system this would seem to be either a manufacturing flaw or a design flaw.   At this point I'm guessing procedural flaw resulting in an over pressure. 

So the naysayers finally have their explosion destroying a Starship on the ground (but only a Starship not a full stack).  It would have been much worse if it had been a booster.  Boca Chica survived unlike the naysayers predictions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71AwkBt3_ts

More as I learn more.

Elon Musk has indicated that a COPV Nitrogen tank failed BELOW its designed pressure use.  I am not totally sure but I think these are not made by SpaceX themselves. 

More as data is released.

EDIT:  The failed COPV?  It was NOT the correct COPV and failed as it was not designed to the same standards for pressure (and maybe capacity) as the correct one.  How this happened is not yet explained.

It does appear that SpaceX custom builds their own COPVs. 

45

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on June 18, 2025, 04:13:07 pm »

IFT 10 Booster 16, Ship 36.

Sun • Jun 29th, 2025, 7:30 PM - 8:30 PM EDT

Subject to change of course.

New Glenn currently has the 2nd flight scheduled for September.  Not betting on it achieving another launch this year.  Not at this time willing to bet against it either. 

46

Engineering / Re: COMMODORE® 64x

« Last post by Javora on June 10, 2025, 07:06:31 am »

https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/retro-gaming/commodore-shocks-retro-techtuber-with-option-to-buy-the-whole-company?utm_term=B51F1BCA-7692-4DA9-B19A-59AE8417D8EC&lrh=ac19c777dd1460d248cec9dc3883261d7db49086fa32bdded9d2639921cb99d5&utm_campaign=2F4928DB-7559-479A-B06E-4801050D48B1&utm_medium=email&utm_content=9AE5EFC6-70A2-4185-A15C-E7CB46B0522C&utm_source=SmartBrief

Commodore may have a new owner??!?

47

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on June 08, 2025, 08:54:39 am »

Blue Origin is living up to their history of announce and delay.  The launches for this spring and summer have all been delayed to September and beyond.  I expect further delays.  No New Glenn launches this year wouldn't surprise me, neither would ONE more this year. 

48

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on May 31, 2025, 06:49:39 pm »

The Trump nomination of Jarred Isaccman for head of NASA has been withdrawn.  Apparently he is not personally loyal enough to Trump to hold such a position.

49

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on May 31, 2025, 01:22:53 pm »

IFT 9 did fly.  Loss of both booster and 2nd stage.

All 33 engines (29 reused 1 of those on its 3rd flight)

The booster used their more aggressive attitude on return.  This may be the cause of the RUD when the engines were ignited.  The modified hot staging ring appears to have "flipped" the booster in the correct direction which will allow fuel savings on future flights as they don't have to waste fuel reorienting. Only 12 of the engines ignited, possibly the engine that didn't light up may have been the cause of failure.

2nd Stage managed the full engine burn (unlike IFT 7 and 8 ).  The venting of fuel (full fuel carried but not needed) resulted in a spin, looks like they had some uncontrolled fuel leaks.  Ice (or maybe dry ice?) was seen floating in the cargo area.  The cargo door failed to open, whether this was because of a cut off due to the spin or inability to open was not clear. 

IFT 10 is being predicted for June and Musk has claimed that it can now launch every three weeks. 

It also seems clear that the new tower can't be used with the current generation of vehicle so they may as well go ahead with using up the remaining 1st gen boosters and engines for testing.

The high bay is now down and construction should soon begin on its larger (in area not so much in height) successor.

Musk also claims a 50% chance of a Mars shot in 2026 and specifies 5 landers (Starship = Lander) and 10 tons of cargo per ship.  Knowing Musk this is more likely a 5% chance so don't hold your breath.

For 2028-2029 he predicts 20 landers each with 75 tons of cargo.  Seems a little too ambitious to be likely.  He does have later predictions but until he actually launches 1 to Mars these "forecasts" are just guesswork as far as I can tell.

50

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on May 27, 2025, 06:09:47 pm »

IFT 9 is fuelling up.  Looks good for launch so far ~ T -20 minutes.