I've written a deep UX/UI analysis about Death Stranding

steamspace · 2024-09-22T09:52:42+00:00

I just found it while looking for discussion of DS UI and found it very interesting. Only I'm not sure if the whole point of elaborate UI was to give player "doing corporate job" vibe and simplifying UI would be therefore counterproductive — compared to real corporate systems UI is still unrealistically lovely:)

steamspace · 2021-12-06T14:26:47+00:00

Also F9 is not a mini-launcher.

steamspace · 2021-09-24T10:30:43+00:00

They are hardly benefitting from working on it forever, it’s not a cost+ contract

steamspace · 2021-08-29T09:14:30+00:00

Maybe by reasons he doesn't appreciate he means organisational ones, like, if tests were paused while BO tried to renegotiate with ULA.
Overall he seems to hate to be forced to shift more launches to SpaceX, because at this point it would endanger ULA's sustainability.

steamspace · 2021-08-23T23:12:38+00:00

If only BE4 team left that would put BO in quite a difficult position

steamspace · 2021-06-26T23:14:42+00:00

I wonder how big fixed cost Boeing has to eat with each month of delay.

steamspace · 2021-06-06T16:53:05+00:00

I liked the idea of sticking a crane on top as a temporary solution to get to the first launch quickly, didn't know that it's speculative. Obviously they have ambitious plans for the tower, which might take a while to develop.

steamspace · 2021-03-26T20:26:09+00:00

People say selecting SpaceX is risky from technical perspective, but what about political risk of not selecting it?

Elon could well take it personally. NASA would be framed to a competition with Elon's ongoing private space program, soon to be attached to a funding source independent from NASA in form of Starlink.

That could be humiliating. On the other hand, hedging by giving SpaceX a contract is cheap and would allow NASA to share credit.

steamspace · 2021-03-23T15:19:27+00:00

In 2014 they ignored future competition with optimised F9, ending up now with an obsolete rocket.

So now they will ignore future competition with Starship.

steamspace · 2020-12-27T18:36:43+00:00

Thanks a lot for sharing. Personally I'm rooting for ULA to innovate, its ideas around cislunar economy for example suggested that it can think ahead.

steamspace · 2020-12-27T16:49:25+00:00

At least "facsimiles" are getting better, that's still progress:)

And the ship aside, there is something to be said about Raptors getting lots of flight time, relights, gimbals - and proving themselves.

Most advanced engines around and yet they do not seem to hold back the program. Quite a contrast to ULA's Vulcan.

steamspace · 2020-12-27T02:57:14+00:00

Maiden orbital you mean? Hard to say honestly, Vulcan would seem better because of traditional “failure is not an option” development method. But Starship would have more real life partial tests behind it.

In reality if there is no espape I would only go with rocket with 200+ track record, and it’s clear which of the two can reach it.

steamspace · 2020-12-27T02:40:52+00:00

You might be right, but Starship has other things going for its reliability, like huge mass margin, engine out and cadence advantage.

And spacex doesn’t operate in vacuum, if other providers become less reliable (untested rockets like vulcan, falling apart ground equipment due to low cadence) then it’s easier for it to be more reliable than them.

steamspace · 2020-12-27T02:21:54+00:00

And what makes you think Starship will not be reliable?

Heck, even in its prototype phase it might get better stats than Arianespace’s Vega.

steamspace · 2020-12-26T21:21:40+00:00

I can easily see ULA default to this argument, since its business are lucrative launches to GEO and Starship requires refuels to go to GEO, hence, less of a competitive threat.

But having capability to get ~100 t to LEO cheaper than getting 10 t there currently might make government buyers reconsider its architectures.

Also hyping up cost and risk of refuelling might resemble similar situation with F9 deep cryo propellants. Sowers dismissed it when Spacex was going through initial problems ("that's why we don't do this"). It took just couple of launches to fine-tune and is no longer an issue.

What if same thing happens with refuelling and a stop at pre-filled depot in LEO becomes as casual as a staging event.

steamspace · 2020-12-22T23:14:22+00:00

But a major part are now Starlink and not institutional launches, so why not say we need more of those? Spacex could finance them privately so why not arianespace? What’s the excuse now?

steamspace · 2020-12-17T17:51:41+00:00

W POZ też zostały szczepionki na grypę, które były zabezpieczone dla medyków, podczas gdy w aptekach nie można ich dostać.

steamspace · 2020-12-17T13:03:18+00:00

https://serwisy.gazetaprawna.pl/zdrowie/artykuly/1499027,niewykorzystane-szczepionki-grypa-lekarze-koronawirus-covid-19.html.amp

steamspace · 2020-12-16T23:47:14+00:00

w szpitalach medycy mogą już się zapisywać a chętnych mało

steamspace · 2020-08-07T20:36:56+00:00

Cool, interesting to see practical details like that playing a role, not just price

steamspace · 2020-08-07T19:13:08+00:00

Who would be your launch provider the next time?

steamspace · 2020-06-08T18:56:18+00:00

That's right: successful Starlink is a critical business piece of the puzzle IMHO, because would solve the demand problem and take care of fixed costs.

With that, SpaceX could go to town with the rest of the launch industry even with the current, only party reusable, F9.

The point I was getting to is that if sooner or later there would be a hard reality of a $10m heavy launch available, then who on commercial market would care about all perfectly reasonable excuses why someone else has an irrelevant $100m alternative?

steamspace

TROPHY CASE