On June 20 2023 07:24 jayemgee wrote: Would it really be that difficult to fake though? And measuring distance from earth to the moon via a mirror on the moon, sounds like a folk tale, is there any examples of any real person doing that?
My issue comes from watching these "nasa fail compilations" on instagram which shows what looks like green screen bugs, people going through the ceiling here's some examples but it seems like there are tons
I only recently started looking into it, but it's made me really skeptical we've ever actually been to the moon. Figured broodwar community is big brained and could let me know what they think. There's also videos of an astronaut called Don Pettit saying we destroyed the technology to go to the moon? ex.
Yes there are lots of examples its not that hard I've seen it personally. Random videos on the internet shouldn't be enough to shake your perception of reality and your views on basic facts about the world.
On June 20 2023 07:24 jayemgee wrote: Would it really be that difficult to fake though? And measuring distance from earth to the moon via a mirror on the moon, sounds like a folk tale, is there any examples of any real person doing that?
My issue comes from watching these "nasa fail compilations" on instagram which shows what looks like green screen bugs, people going through the ceiling here's some examples but it seems like there are tons
Yes there are lots of examples its not that hard I've seen it personally. Random videos on the internet shouldn't be enough to shake your perception of reality and your views on basic facts about the world.
Fair enough, but isn't my proof that NASA has been to the moon also random videos from TV/internet (or government officials telling us it is so) that are determining these "basic facts" even though I can't technically prove it besides videos from TV? I don't think I can necessarily call it a fact.
It's only something I've recently come across but the amount of evidence of green screens, holding onto harnesses, it's not just a random video here or there. It's hundreds.. To me it's not a question of if they're using them (they obviously are) the question is "why." I don't see why basic assumptions that NASA is visiting space (it isn't a fact since we can't prove it) means I should, with a clear mind, (I have never used drugs in my life) ignore evidence that green screens and harnesses are being used in video evidence of said assumptions of a zero gravity environment..
Do you have any other reason to join TL than to peddle a NASA conspiracy theory? Because if not, I will just save your time and our time and ban you.
I can understand coming into a thread of NASA fans and saying "they may be faking it" might be instigating and disliked by proponents of the agency. If it is not allowed to be skeptical of their work here, I understand and will leave the thread. We're all technically space travel fans since we like broodwar but nevertheless.
“Technically, we think we know what we’re doing. I think ultimately with every next successful launch, we’ll demonstrate that.”
They even goes as far as saying they have NOT discussed plans to scrap said system and move to another version. Despite delays costing them over $900 million so far.
WASHINGTON — The chief executive of Boeing says his company is still committed to the CST-100 Starliner commercial crew vehicle despite the latest problems that have further delayed the program.
In an interview on the “Check 6” podcast by Aviation Week published June 16, Dave Calhoun said that Boeing was not “shutting the door” on Starliner after the company postponed the first crewed flight of the vehicle that had been scheduled for late July.
“We’re going to do whatever NASA asks us to do,” he said when asked about the program at the end of the podcast. “We do believe in it, and we believe there has to be more than one player.”
NASA is currently relying on its other commercial crew partner, SpaceX, to transport astronauts to and from the International Space Station on its Crew Dragon spacecraft. SpaceX has conducted 10 crewed launches over three years, seven for NASA and three fully commercial ones, including the Ax-2 flight to the station in May.
Boeing had been preparing from its Crew Flight Test (CFT) mission, the first flight of Starliner with astronauts on board, when it announced June 1 that it was postponing the launch. Recent reviews found issues with parts of the spacecraft’s parachute system as well as tape used in wire harnesses that is flammable.
In that briefing, Mark Nappi, vice president and program manager for CST-100 Starliner at Boeing, appeared to raise questions about the future of the overall Starliner effort, saying the company had been talking internally “about the future of Starliner and how we’re going to move forward.” He later clarified that meant long-term evaluations about building another spacecraft and shifting from the Atlas 5. There had not been “serious discussions” about terminating the program, he added.
“We have definitely fallen behind in it,” Calhoun acknowledged in the podcast about Boeing’s work on Starliner compared to SpaceX’s Crew Dragon. “Technically, we think we know what we’re doing. I think ultimately with every next successful launch, we’ll demonstrate that.”
Neither NASA nor Boeing has provided an update on either the parachute or tape issues since the June 1 announcement. At that time, Nappi said he would not comment on how long the CFT mission would be delayed “until we spend the next several days understanding what we need to go do.”
At a June 8 Space Transportation Association event here, Ken Bowersox, NASA associate administrator for space operations, said those reviews were still ongoing. “We’re trying to find the best opportunity,” he said, suggesting at the time it would take an additional one to two weeks. “We want to make sure Starliner launches when it’s ready.”
Both Bowersox and Janet Petro, director of the Kennedy Space Center, said a rescheduled launch for the CFT mission would depend not just on the vehicle’s readiness but also the overall launch manifest. “Because there is such a heavy manifest, it always becomes a discussion between the various NASA programs and between the Space Force and their missions as to when we can fit it in,” she said.
Boeing has not disclosed what additional costs it will incur from this latest delay. The company has recorded nearly $900 million in charges against earnings for the program from past problems and delays, raising questions about whether Starliner will ever break even.
“We’re not shutting the door on it in any way, shape or form,” Calhoun said of Starliner. “We intend to do it — make money on it — but we’re going to let the market and our customer let that play out, and we’ll see what happens.”
He appeared to deemphasize that part of Boeing’s overall space portfolio, highlighting instead its work on the Space Launch System and various defense program. “Low Earth orbit and building out a big presence in that world is not going to be our number one focus,” he said. Boeing is one of the partners on Orbital Reef, a commercial space station project led by Blue Origin and Sierra Space.
Astra is desperately trying to avoid Bankruptcy, as well as being delisted from the NASDAQ. But it would only give them, they hope. 65 million in cash injection. Last Quarter they lost over 40 million...
Spacecraft engine manufacturer and small rocket builder Astra plans to conduct a reverse stock split at a 1 to 15 ratio, the company disclosed in a securities filing Monday.
Astra also seeks to raise up to $65 million through an “at the market” offering of common stock, the filing said.
Shares of Astra were little changed in after-hours trading from their close at 40 cents a share. The company went public in July 2021 via a SPAC deal, at a near $2 billion valuation, before the stock began to tumble after launch failures and development setbacks.
Astra’s filing said the reverse stock split is expected to take place on or before October 2, after its board approved the plan July 6. The company previously outlined a reverse split as part of its plan to avoid delisting by the Nasdaq exchange.
A reverse split does not affect the fundamentals of a company, as it is not dilutive to the stock and does not change the company’s valuation, but it would lift the stock price by combining shares. A reverse split can be seen as a sign a company is in distress and is trying to “artificially” boost its stock price, or it can be viewed as a way for a viable company with a beaten up stock to continue operations on a public exchange. Functionally, a reverse split, often done as a 1 for 10, would mean a $3 stock, for example, would become $30 a share.
Yeah, we're going to see a consolidation in the launch industry. SpaceX has the medium-large launch market sewn up, and there isn't enough demand for smallsat launch for how many providers are trying to vie for the market.
If you can't do it reliably now, there's little hope of breaking through into the market, and making a profit to justify the R&D.
So Blue Origin.... one of their flight engines blew up during a test last month. Not only was the engine destroyed, but the test stand was severely damaged as well.
A Blue Origin rocket engine exploded during testing last month, CNBC has learned, a destructive setback with potential ramifications for the company’s customers and its own rocket.
During a firing on June 30 at a West Texas facility of Jeff Bezos’ space company, a BE-4 engine detonated about 10 seconds into the test, according to several people familiar with the matter. Those people described having seen video of a dramatic explosion that destroyed the engine and heavily damaged the test stand infrastructure.
The people spoke to CNBC on the condition of anonymity to discuss nonpublic matters.
The engine that exploded was expected to finish testing in July. It was then scheduled to ship to Blue Origin’s customer United Launch Alliance for use on ULA’s second Vulcan rocket launch, those people said.
A Blue Origin spokesperson, in a statement to CNBC on Tuesday, confirmed the company “ran into an issue while testing Vulcan’s Flight Engine 3.”
“No personnel were injured and we are currently assessing root cause,” Blue Origin said, adding “we already have proximate cause and are working on remedial actions.”
The company noted it “immediately” made its customer ULA aware of the incident. ULA is the rocket-building joint venture of Boeing and Lockheed Martin, which competes primarily with Elon Musk’s SpaceX, especially going head-to-head over the most lucrative military launch contracts.
On July 12 2023 05:46 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So Blue Origin.... one of their flight engines blew up during a test last month. Not only was the engine destroyed, but the test stand was severely damaged as well.
A Blue Origin rocket engine exploded during testing last month, CNBC has learned, a destructive setback with potential ramifications for the company’s customers and its own rocket.
During a firing on June 30 at a West Texas facility of Jeff Bezos’ space company, a BE-4 engine detonated about 10 seconds into the test, according to several people familiar with the matter. Those people described having seen video of a dramatic explosion that destroyed the engine and heavily damaged the test stand infrastructure.
The people spoke to CNBC on the condition of anonymity to discuss nonpublic matters.
The engine that exploded was expected to finish testing in July. It was then scheduled to ship to Blue Origin’s customer United Launch Alliance for use on ULA’s second Vulcan rocket launch, those people said.
A Blue Origin spokesperson, in a statement to CNBC on Tuesday, confirmed the company “ran into an issue while testing Vulcan’s Flight Engine 3.”
“No personnel were injured and we are currently assessing root cause,” Blue Origin said, adding “we already have proximate cause and are working on remedial actions.”
The company noted it “immediately” made its customer ULA aware of the incident. ULA is the rocket-building joint venture of Boeing and Lockheed Martin, which competes primarily with Elon Musk’s SpaceX, especially going head-to-head over the most lucrative military launch contracts.
Pretty sure everyone here knows where I stand on legacy companies in today's space game. But this is just...embarrassing on a new level. I'd rather Lockheed make the damn engine with Rolls Royce than see this BO fiasco continue.
Virgin Galactic has announced it is preparing its' second commercial launch starting on August 10th.
July 13 (Reuters) - Virgin Galactic Holdings (SPCE.N) said on Thursday that the space tourism startup will launch its second commercial flight in a window that opens next month after a successful first flight in June.
The firm is among the few U.S.-based space companies, along with Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin and Elon Musk's SpaceX, to cater to the burgeoning demand for commercial space operations and space travel.
Shares of the company founded by British billionaire Richard Branson rose about 3% in trading before the bell, after having gained 11% so far this year.
Details on crew, pilots and the flight manifest for the mission set to launch in a window opening on Aug. 10, will be released later, the company said.
A three-member crew of its first-mission 'Galactic-01' made the brief suborbital ride, marking a long-delayed breakthrough for the company, finally inaugurating commercial service after being fraught with development setbacks for nearly 20 years.
Virgin Galactic had earlier said it has already booked a backlog of some 800 customers, charging most from $250,000 to $450,000 per seat, and envisions eventually building a large enough fleet to accommodate more than one flight a day.
The 'Galactic-02' mission will also be live streamed on the company's website.
EPT
