You must log in or # to comment.
I’d be nervous about that return journey. Coming in hot like that might spook any number of nations right now, including the U.S.
Everyone knows it’s happening tho so it’s fine
If you say so. Fingers crossed.
Also, it’s gonna come down in the ocean nearish the US on a very different trajectory from any ballistic missile. And it will be very very well tracked the whole way, and televised.
The people who are actually in charge of missile defense are wayyy more competent than most of our government
Edit: also a very different radar signature probably due to how it’s shaped
Here’s hoping you’re right, my friend.
I’d still be nervous.
Actually there is a non zero chance Orion burns completely during re-entry.
Couldn’t fix the faulty design of the heat shield from Artemis 1. So they will try a different re-entry trajectory to minimize the heat lol.
They sped up the re-entry to increase heat transfer rate to reduce off gassing issues. This is a great example of why engineering sometimes doesn’t release a full description of issues, because dumb people don’t understand why a decision is made.
Please avoid calling people dumb on the internet. And whatever you just said about not being transparent and the reason for it is so short sightest I’m honnestly wondering if you know what you are saying.
From the article I shared:
“I would never be happy accepting a workaround and flying something that I know is the worst version of that heat shield we could possibly fly and hoping that the workaround is going to fix it,” Camarda said. “What I really hope he [Isaacman] gets is that if we don’t get back to doing research at NASA, we’re not going to be able to help Starship solve their problems. We’ve got to get back to doing research.”
You honesfly think the new re-entry trajectory is not a workaround? Do you work there? Please provide some source. Sorry I forgot, I’m too dumb to understand, I don’t deserve full description of the issues.
You mocked them, I’ll call you stupid for it. You claimed they reduced heat transfer rate, which is false. The answer is in the article you linked.
For Artemis II, it would return through Earth’s atmosphere at a steeper angle, spending fewer minutes in the environment where this outgassing occurred during Artemis I.
This change is a perfect example of engineering research. Artemis I was within the expected boundaries of the heat shield material. It performed worse than expected, so they adjusted its heat exposure rate based on the actual outcome. The guy in the article seems to not understand that this is a huge part of actual engineering.
I’m a mechanical engineer. The article is mostly fluff sucking off to the rich guy you quoted.
Seems to me the Artemis rocket would be
uncachablegoing to fast to be caught by the time it is near Kuwait.Trick is to aim where it will be when the thing intercepts it, not where it currently is. And if the rocket is a woman or child, just reduce the lead distance.
I understood that reference
I need this article lol