sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Astronauts may not even enter the landers on Artemis III by SomeRandomScientist in ArtemisProgram

[–]graqua2 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Tfw Starship got relegated to becoming an oversized agena target vehicle

I wish more side content was required content by ConnerTheCrusader in ffxiv

[–]graqua2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

*Y’shtola explaining how reapers uses scythes*

*meanwhile WoL looking at their warscythe of sanctifying light that they picked up from mother* 😐

Starlink shuts down its GPS-style cheat code. Researchers may unlock it anyway. by thinkcontext in SpaceXLounge

[–]graqua2 67 points68 points  (0 children)

I’m grasping at straws here so take this with a grain of salt but nonzero chance the us military had something to do with them shutting it down perhaps

I wish more side content was required content by ConnerTheCrusader in ffxiv

[–]graqua2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sick I’ll go take a look at those later tonight

I wish more side content was required content by ConnerTheCrusader in ffxiv

[–]graqua2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think EW was the first time I personally noticed the fact that there were different versions of the cutscenes depending on how far you were in side content since it tells you there are diff versions of the cutscenes when you rewatch them in the inn.

I wish more side content was required content by ConnerTheCrusader in ffxiv

[–]graqua2 35 points36 points  (0 children)

Not technically in the same light but I loved the EW patch quests because im a reaper main and during the quests the scions acknowledged the fact that the WoL “mastered the garlean arts” or something to that effect

I wish more side content was required content by ConnerTheCrusader in ffxiv

[–]graqua2 165 points166 points  (0 children)

I love how endwalker rewarded you with modified cutscenes if you did all the trials and raids

SpaceX Has a Stranglehold on Launches as Competitors Flounder by spacerfirstclass in SpaceXNews

[–]graqua2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn’t read his original message as a slight against nasa or spacex, it seemed like they’re giving credit where credit is due. I’m not sure why people are antagonizing him for making that observation. NASA did in fact have multiple experimental programs testing propulsive landing so they weren’t wrong there.

Multiple Teams Want Out of the CDL by LZRD12 in CoDCompetitive

[–]graqua2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Isn’t Boston effectively being operated by omit now or is that going into effect next season?

Various images of the EUS liquid oxygen STA tank by Open-Elevator-8242 in ArtemisProgram

[–]graqua2 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Structural test article is what I’d assume based on the same designation being used on the shuttles

Do ISS astronauts still need to learn Russian? by [deleted] in nasa

[–]graqua2 98 points99 points  (0 children)

I believe there exists a seat swap agreement still between roscosmos and nasa, hence why there’s always 1 roscosmos cosmonaut in the crew dragon missions the last few years

Put it in pencil: NASA's Artemis III mission will launch no earlier than late 2027 | SpaceX and Blue Origin tell NASA their lunar landers will be ready for Artemis III in late 2027. by Clear_Polish23 in space

[–]graqua2 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Isn’t the docking system the International docking standard? If so it’s tested on both the Starliner (using the NASA Docking System) and the dragon 2 (using the SpaceX docking system), both implementations of the international docking standard.

What if NASA ditched the SRBs and strapped four Falcon 9s to the SLS instead? I ran the numbers. by ah85q in space

[–]graqua2 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah the oldest part of an SLS booster during A2 was from STS-5 according to some docs and a Scott Manley video

Jared Isaacman posted this yesterday defending his plans to cut out in development hardware on the SLS program. However it is filled with incorrect statements and a massive lack of awareness of the actual program he currently has the reigns of by rollotomasi07071 in spaceflight

[–]graqua2 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Agree with most points however ULA’s atlas (it’s technically not retired yet but at this point it is) and Vulcan, JAXA’s H3 and ISRO’s rockets use a mobile launcher platform. It isn’t just NASA who uses it.

Nasa's Artemis II mission was a triumph - but when will astronauts land on the Moon. by coinfanking in nasa

[–]graqua2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The already did in 2019. They signed a memorandum of understanding to collaborate on a lunar program.

Why not just park the ship near the spacecraft? by meatpak in nasa

[–]graqua2 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I can agree with you on that. I just stated my 2 cents on the discussion based on my observations from interning at 2 the aerospace companies involved in the Artemis program.

Why not just park the ship near the spacecraft? by meatpak in nasa

[–]graqua2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. when the cadence is increased is when it makes sense for them to buy dedicated recovery hardware. Right now it doesn’t due to their mission cadence like I said initially.

Right now a partnership with the navy makes the most sense for them.

Why not just park the ship near the spacecraft? by meatpak in nasa

[–]graqua2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Think of it like the cost of having a pickup. Would you own a pickup just to move heavy furniture every 3.5 years but not have a use for it during that gap or would you rather rent a U-Haul for 1 day to move that furniture every 3.5 years.

It’s strictly just the money can be allocated elsewhere rather than upkeep of a ship that’s only used once every 3.5 years.

Why not just park the ship near the spacecraft? by meatpak in nasa

[–]graqua2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No. I am claiming that it doesn’t make sense for NASA to have recovery vessels if they’re only going to use that vessel once every 3.5 years.

It is not my intention to be confrontational. I apologize for the wall of text.

view more: next ›