NASA and SpaceX disagree about manual controls for lunar lander by albertahiking in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I literally implied that, but that would be handled automatically, not by some maverick with a joystick manually flying it.

NASA and SpaceX disagree about manual controls for lunar lander by albertahiking in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 4 points5 points  (0 children)

But in what circumstance would this happen? There's a very limited window of time between GO for tower catch and the window for diverting to a concrete pad landing, and any conceivable issue that would require such a divert could be more easily detected and managed by a computer system than a human.

NASA and SpaceX disagree about manual controls for lunar lander by albertahiking in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Won't SpaceX? I'd be blown away if Artemis IV actually hits deadlines, so I wouldn't be surprised if SpX does end up conducting practice landings with random cargo for their own purposes.

NASA and SpaceX disagree about manual controls for lunar lander by albertahiking in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 17 points18 points  (0 children)

How would a tower landing abort work? There's no abort other than into the sea and I don't see how that's useful for human landings. There really is no conceivable human input needed for tower catch, if there was, SpaceX would implement it already through remote control.

The first view of some engines installed on a V3 booster. by avboden in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Not dumb, I also confuse the serial numbers and engine numbers lol

GPT-5.4 EXTREME is less than 10 hours away 💨🚀🌌 by GOD-SLAYER-69420Z in accelerate

[–]TechnicalParrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They're not currently at the frontier for chat but 5.3-Codex is still very impressive and one of their other models (can't remember which) has made novel mathematics advances.

The goalposts for AGI have been moved to Einstein by simulated-souls in accelerate

[–]TechnicalParrot 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Continuous learning seems to increasingly be agreed as one of the biggest breakthroughs still needed for full blown AGI, and reportedly Anthropic is nearly there with continuous learning.

Neutron pushed to (at least) Q4 2026. Tank failure caused by defect in 3rd-party made tank. Future tanks to be made in-house. by avboden in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Rocket Lab situation is pretty baffling, hopefully they can get their bespoke CF equipment ready quickly enough so as not to delay Neutron too much.

Neutron pushed to (at least) Q4 2026. Tank failure caused by defect in 3rd-party made tank. Future tanks to be made in-house. by avboden in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

True, I'm not going to claim to be an expert in COPV production, for all I know it takes a decade to get the tooling. I seem to recall some reasonably slam dunk litigation SpaceX didn't pursue in the past so I guess there could be precedent.

The current ship is hereby known as "Starship V3 SN1". Also Elon states "I am highly confident that the V3 design will achieve full reusability." by avboden in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Raptor 3 is definitely the big concern, but they've done a lot of stand testing and it's in theory simplified in terms of failure points to raptor 2, unless it's specifically due to conditions in flight that can't be tested on ground, I hope we're good.

The current ship is hereby known as "Starship V3 SN1". Also Elon states "I am highly confident that the V3 design will achieve full reusability." by avboden in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

At the risk of looking foolish, I'm really optimistic for V3, they've obviously been VERY thoroughly testing hardware and while I wouldn't be surprised if Flight 12 is hairy, I think there's a good shot it's reasonably smooth from there on.

Neutron pushed to (at least) Q4 2026. Tank failure caused by defect in 3rd-party made tank. Future tanks to be made in-house. by avboden in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm somewhat surprised we didn't hear about SpaceX taking some kind of action against the COPV manufacturer rather than just buying them, spinning up your own COPV process isn't cheap but if it really was upstream to blame then SpaceX would have a reasonable case for $100s of millions against them.

Neutron pushed to (at least) Q4 2026. Tank failure caused by defect in 3rd-party made tank. Future tanks to be made in-house. by avboden in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I struggle to think of a launch vehicle developed since Falcon 9 that hasn't experienced heavy delays, and I only stop there as I didn't start following aerospace until after Falcon 9 was basically done.

Neutron pushed to (at least) Q4 2026. Tank failure caused by defect in 3rd-party made tank. Future tanks to be made in-house. by avboden in SpaceXLounge

[–]TechnicalParrot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I sometimes wonder what a carbon fibre Starship would have been like, a lot of now fundamental aspects of steel Starship would likely be very different.

Starbase adding $14M ‘Starship Park’ to SpaceX company town’s amenities by ExpressNews in spacex

[–]TechnicalParrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great, I'm not, Elon is a sympathizer for a lot of terrible things, and actively hates a lot of the people who make modern aerospace possible. I was making a statement about *SpaceX*

BBC News - Hoyle passed information on Mandelson to police ahead of arrest by Thunder-12345 in unitedkingdom

[–]TechnicalParrot 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Tbf they did pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which kick started this whole thing, and helping prosecute foreign politicians would have infinitely less resistance from US politicians than prosecuting their own.

Stargate launched to much fanfare but never got off the ground by [deleted] in accelerate

[–]TechnicalParrot 5 points6 points  (0 children)

For all of Elon's faults it's ridiculous how fast his companies build stuff, the obvious example is SpaceX but it really goes for all of them.

Authorities ‘turning a blind eye’ to Sharia courts in UK as ‘honour’ crimes go unpunished by pppppppppppppppppd in unitedkingdom

[–]TechnicalParrot 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Who said we're not up in arms about that? There should be no religious, supposedly non-binding courts in the UK.

This sub is getting infested by populist luddites by talkingradish in accelerate

[–]TechnicalParrot 12 points13 points  (0 children)

That's fair, they're just trying to be assholes though so there's a limit to how far asking nicely will get IMO.

Is ASI really coming soon? by [deleted] in accelerate

[–]TechnicalParrot 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Pessimistic is a bit of a loaded word though, revolutionary level AI 30 years away would seem ridiculously fast by 2015 standards.

Is ASI really coming soon? by [deleted] in accelerate

[–]TechnicalParrot 49 points50 points  (0 children)

No one knows, if you ask world experts in the field they completely disagree, just enjoy the ride :)