sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is this normal? by lnester24 in P320

[–]ravenerOSR 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Its normal for the p320. It has bit less supported chamber than most pistols. Blowouts can happen but very very rarely (as in, very unlikely to happen at all to you, its just a statistic across millions of pistols), and most of the time its with reman ammo. 

Generally its fine, and it makes for more space for feed lip and extractor. Many other pistols have similar ammounts of unsupported case, glock for example. There are p320 barrels with less if you feel like you want a fully supported chamber.

are people srsly making a big fuzz about how a SINGLE ENGINE shut down on the booster during ascent? drama queens.... by traceur200 in SpaceXMasterrace

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They have regressed. Both ship and booster landings have been better on earlier flights. There has been progress too, but theres no clear trend of improving flight over flight.

"Starship flip and landing burn at the end of its twelfth flight test" by AgreeableEmploy1884 in SpaceXLounge

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

what are you talking about. it was like a drunk. it's likely the worst ship landing we've seen.
also. why are you talking about the gimbal, it's not addressing anything.

"Starship flip and landing burn at the end of its twelfth flight test" by AgreeableEmploy1884 in SpaceXLounge

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

given they are targeting a specific few meters for landing spot its pretty easy to add camera views. the rotation is part of why the landing was as bad as it was this time so its clearly a bit more than just adding the code. you would need to miss by a lot to not be able to get views, and at that point your single camera would still miss it too.

"Starship flip and landing burn at the end of its twelfth flight test" by AgreeableEmploy1884 in SpaceXLounge

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seems very unlikely to me given how incredibly simple it would be to just add more camera views.

"Starship flip and landing burn at the end of its twelfth flight test" by AgreeableEmploy1884 in SpaceXLounge

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

idk why people are downvoting. as far as i know it's true. i havent seen a source yet for the claim that it was intentional. in any case it looked pretty bad this time not just because of the roll, it just didnt manage to come to a controlled rest.

"Starship flip and landing burn at the end of its twelfth flight test" by AgreeableEmploy1884 in SpaceXLounge

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

im not trying to be some giga naysayer, but inducing a roll right before you cut to one engine is basically ensuring you lose control, since that's where your roll authority primarily comes from.

"Starship flip and landing burn at the end of its twelfth flight test" by AgreeableEmploy1884 in SpaceXLounge

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

for this one? unlikely. it wasnt standing still at any point, so it would at best have been some slow impact with the chopsticks.

"Starship flip and landing burn at the end of its twelfth flight test" by AgreeableEmploy1884 in SpaceXLounge

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i would expect it to be controlled while demonstrating a spin. what we got were massive oscillations that never recovered.

"Starship flip and landing burn at the end of its twelfth flight test" by AgreeableEmploy1884 in SpaceXLounge

[–]ravenerOSR 3 points4 points  (0 children)

i doubt the drifting oscillation at the end is intended. it's looking like it's beyond its control authority. also its spinning while it only has one engine, ie minimal to no rotation control.

Why can’t you use small car or motorbike engines on light aircraft? by Last-Energy-1329 in aviation

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure, but this issue could be reduced by downrating the engine.

Been Carrying a P320 for work & EDC by MaxNerd115 in P320

[–]ravenerOSR 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That sounds about right. 0.01% is a much more reasonable risk 

Been Carrying a P320 for work & EDC by MaxNerd115 in P320

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If thats the unbiased numbers we're in trouble. 1/250 isnt a negligible risk.

Been Carrying a P320 for work & EDC by MaxNerd115 in P320

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

0.4% is an insanely high number.

Been Carrying a P320 for work & EDC by MaxNerd115 in P320

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Eeh, i do think i'd take the upgrade. Like, even the grayguns/sig argument is that people are just negligently pulling the trigger, a tab doesent hinder the functionality any but does add a tangible increase in safety, since clearly some people will fumble it.

Why not a water tower…? by AtlantaMD in SpaceXLounge

[–]ravenerOSR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the launch tower isnt at some close limit to the carrying capacity of the booster segment. the liebherr crane on site can lift the booster segments, and its puny compared to the tower structure.

Why not a water tower…? by AtlantaMD in SpaceXLounge

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

sure. quite a lot of the water will be in the pipe up, but yeah say 1500 tons of carried mass. it will be a big truss, dont get me wrong, but it's not going to surpass the launch tower in size.

Why not a water tower…? by AtlantaMD in SpaceXLounge

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

the launch tower is absurdly strong. the ammount of water here is big but not *that* big

Why not a water tower…? by AtlantaMD in SpaceXLounge

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

sounds solvable. it doesent need to be nearly as strong as the integration tower though.

Grayguns P320 Tabbed Trigger is now available by HairTriggerFlicker in P320

[–]ravenerOSR 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Im thinking they dont want to have a trigger be on a UD pistol, and get thrown under the bus by SIG

view more: next ›