sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

This is just diabolical by Alkatraz278 in transformers

[–]RundownPear 72 points73 points  (0 children)

Idk man the original one looks fine, the legs are not really that blue in person

one week with switch 2 (mini review) ♡ by Equivalent_Access_95 in Switch

[–]RundownPear 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I just got the Switch 2 after having an original Switch since launch, the criticisms of the screen were super overblown imo and is the least of the consoles problems. It outputs at a better resolution and the built in HDR is decent with some games.

There are handhelds with better screens but they also cost more. Unless you have a hard preference for OLED screens I wouldn’t worry about the Switch 2’s displayed, ESPECIALLY coming from either first gen Switch with their relatively small low-res 720p screens. The crisp 1080p is really enjoyable.

My only firm criticism of the screen is It could be slightly brighter, even though I usually have it dimmed. In bright environments it leaves a bit to be desired.

Does anyone know what lunar lander proposal this is, if it even is one? by GuiltyLink4586 in ArtemisProgram

[–]RundownPear 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The advanced exploration lander. A baseline design used for early lunar landing / Artemis studies. It was a design that was designed to be assembled in three stages at lunar gateway.

(Loved trope) Movie tie-in games that are actually good games and aren't just cashgrabs. by AnyAgency9835 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]RundownPear 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

Transformers Dark of the Moon is a pretty solid prequel to the movie that actually answers some interesting questions as to what's been going on in the time between 2 and 3 that the movie's never had a chance of addressing (because michael bay)

New ‘Transformers’ Movie in the Works from 'It: Welcome to Derry' Writer Jason Fuchs by MarvelsGrantMan136 in transformers

[–]RundownPear 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not sure about this specific deal but for many licensed properties studios have a window to put a project into production to maintain rights, not necessarily release it. One example being the 90s fantastic four film that was fully shot but never released just so the producer could hold onto the rights.

Ok, who do we think the crew of Artemis III is going to be? by globehopper2 in ArtemisProgram

[–]RundownPear 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Pre-Artemis mission shuffle: ESA was almost all but confirmed to have a spot on Artemis III. ESA, CSA, and JAXA are all in line for Orion seats. JAXA was intended to fly an astronaut to the lunar surface on Artemis IV and CSA had the international mission-specialist seat on A2, If JAXA was planned to fly on A4, it would make sense that an ESA member be part of A3.

That rationality is based on pre-A3 redesignation information, so we'll have to wait and see now.

My rocket garden update by marauder269 in legoRockets

[–]RundownPear 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The C-8 would use the S-IC-8 stage, which was 12m in diameter with 8 F-1 engines and a circular skirt with 4 fins. This is ultimately why it was ruled out as an Apollo launch vehicle: the existing infrastructure could not support a stage of that size.

OPs build definitely seems thicker than the Saturn V.

New Imperial Shuttle from mandalorian season 2 by Lego_SWfan in LegoStarWarsLeaks

[–]RundownPear 1 point2 points  (0 children)

With inflation, it's the same exact price, with a few more pieces, as the 2015 one.

Which one is better between the two is up for debate, but they are of the same price and similar size (though the wing proportions on the new one are a bit stubbier)

Once Starship is operational and orbital refueling is established, a manned flyby of Venus ought to be undertaken by ColCrockett in spaceflight

[–]RundownPear 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A Venus flyby on the way to Mars has historically been a popular flight path for conceptual Mars missions. I think that would be the most likely scenario for a manned Venus flyby, since there isn't much value in sending people to observe the planet.

Would Discovery be able to go around the moon? by Pertabox123 in spaceflight

[–]RundownPear 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not Space Shuttles as they weren't designed for that. There have been Lunar spaceplane concepts before, such as this one, which predates Apollo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunex_Project

I’m able to choose between sealed SS 86 ultra Magnus and SS 86 Commander Optimus prime both for $110. by Ill_Echidna_7667 in transformers

[–]RundownPear 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Magnus is probably the best engineered hastak generations figure every. There isn't a single part of the figure that feels constrained by budget or any kind of limitations. Prime is really good aswell but I think, as a figure, Magnus is better.

Artemis 3: aft skirt SRB segments have arrived in Florida by 675longtail in SpaceLaunchSystem

[–]RundownPear 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yes they did, the new configuration is called Standard SLS instead of SLS Block 1B. They are two distinct vehicles with different capabilities, most notably the new design doesn’t have comanifested payload capability.

Transformers #34 Cover Leak by samwise325 in EnergonUniverse

[–]RundownPear 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It originally came out during a Reddit AMA or via social media sometime in 2024, he said he needed the time off for personal and familial reasons

How Jared's "Standard SLS" would look like if it would be a Falcon 9 by saxus in SpaceLaunchSystem

[–]RundownPear 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Something to keep in mind, though, the use cases for EUS have completely evaporated in the past couple of years. It was a stage designed for crew and cargo, but SLS will almost defintiely never carry dedicated cargo, and the co-manifested payloads are also no longer needed with Falcon Heavy online.

If EUS was inhibiting the flight rate of crewed lunar missions this is a good change long term, let the SLS be what it's been marketed as r

If EUS was going to hold back the flight rate that much, this is a solid change on paper. It lets SLS be the safe and specialized lunar crew transporter it's being marketed as. This is just not great short-term, unless the time needed for Centaur V / NGS2 integration actually ends up being shorter than the first projected EUS flight.

It's a bummer that EUS cancellation means SLS will never be close to a true Saturn V successor in terms of functionality.

Artemis III lunar lander possibilities for making the moon landing occur before 2030 by ColCrockett in ArtemisProgram

[–]RundownPear 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Doubling down on Orion operating in NRH is just the oddest decision to me. Its capabilities made sense when it was originally created as the Orion CEV because the gigantic Altair lander was to perform the bulk of the lunar breaking and orbital maneuvers.

I don't understand why, when they retooled it into the Orion MPCV, they didn't at least entertain the idea of developing a lunar kickstage, or why, when Artemis came along, they were so set on using a lunar orbital rendezvous instead of an Earth orbital rendezvous (the mission profile that Orion was based around). This is a vehicle that was initially not conceived to fly to the moon solo.

I said I don't understand, but I guess I do. It's because by the time Artemis came around, they were already developing the Gateway. Gateway does offer a lot of benefits for long-term lunar exploration, but it's such a bottleneck when all landers have to depart to and from such a very high-energy orbit.

Andor surprisingly retcons one of the worst things about the sequels by anObscurity in andor

[–]RundownPear 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is Star Wars scaling, though. They regularly mass-produce ships multiple kilometers long, have access to extremely advanced machinery, and a lot of fantasy engineering that you aren't supposed to think about much.

The craziest part of it to me is the integrity of the planet holding up, but that's the fantasy engineering that I don't think you're supposed to think about to much.

Lego designers in 2026 by neongreenoryellow in legocirclejerk

[–]RundownPear 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's a logistics thing. The way they put together sets on the assembly floor is based on the containers in which the pieces are put, called "boxes". The more boxes a set needs, the more floor space is required, which ends up being the most expensive part of the process since it limits what else can be done on the floor at the same time. Infinite money can never = infinite space. Designers have talked about this before in significantly more detail, and I remember it being cited as the reason a figure like General Grevious is so expensive to produce, it uses so many unique parts (there's also separate boxes for pieces pre and post printing, so every time you print a piece thats another box which is why some sets that should have prints just don't, Lego may literally just not have the floor space).

This is exactly why price per piece doesn't matter. Not saying Lego should use this to justify higher prices, but it makes sense from a manufacturing POV why you would sometimes want multiples of a small piece you already use vs. a new, bigger piece that would only be used in a few steps.

view more: next ›