Login
You're viewing the oslo.town public feed.

Replies

  • 💬 5🔄 1⭐ 2
  • itgrrl :donor:itgrrl@infosec.exchange
    Oct 24, 2026, 11:11 PM

    @AkaSci I see more complexity / more single points of failure & I get more anxious for 1) the safety of the crew, & 2) the possibility of mission success 😕

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Carsten Frankecarstenfranke@mastodon.social
    Oct 24, 2026, 11:37 PM

    @AkaSci that 50 m tall thingy looks a little tippy.... (and the purchasing department at the second lander company is horrible, I refused to do business with them, might have caused a delay...)

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Urwumpeurwumpe@hessen.social
    Oct 25, 2026, 12:00 AM

    @Legit_Spaghetti @carstenfranke @AkaSci Not with 22 (+) refueling missions. SpaceX would need to build a large fleet of boosters and Tankers just to do the demo mission before the fuel is boiled off.

    The Blue Origin recycling of a nice old CEV proposal from the 2000s is clearly simpler to pull off, but more boring.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Douglasdouglasvb@m.ai6yr.org
    Oct 24, 2026, 11:37 PM

    @AkaSci Both of those seem wildly complex and ripe for delay if anything goes wrong with any of the launches.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Mark McCaughreanmarkmccaughrean@mastodon.social
    Oct 25, 2026, 12:07 AM

    @AkaSci These ridiculously complicated systems ain’t your grandfather’s Apollo. And none of them are landing humans on the Moon in 2028.

    It must be immensely difficult for the many expert & dedicated engineers at NASA to have to pretend all this untried tech is going to work, not least in just two years time, with narcissistic blowhards in charge of the three major components.

    And quite what my ESA colleagues are thinking, given that the ESM is right in the middle of this hooey.

    💬 0🔄 3⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0