It's possible to plan for multiple eventualities. They may have pushed it to its limits (or beyond) and decided the best destination based on how it handled it
One of the commentators said (roughly) "they can make another rocket real quick, but if they blow their one pad up then they are hosed for a long time."
I like SpaceX as much as the next nerd but that's not "intentionally crashing the booster" it's "doing the only other type of landing you can when you abort the first plan of landing it successfully". I'm sure they got useful data out of it (it's better than "booster blows up in mid air") but this is squarely in "2nd attempt to land with chopsticks wasn't as ready as they hoped" bucket, not "132nd attempt to land the booster was intentionally destroying it to see how much farther they could be pushing it" as was originally implied with the wording and prior example.
Oh, sure, I didn't want to make any comment on what they were actually doing or trying to accomplish. Only that the hypothetical we were talking about would have been consistent.
There's a lot of middle ground here. I suspect what's most accurate is "let's push the booster out of envelope a bit, if we get really nice numbers we'll go for the chopsticks landing, otherwise it's into the drink".
In other words, they were optimistic enough to think that another upright landing was within the realm of possibility, while also deliberately doing things which made that outcome less likely, to get the data they need.
If that's true, I wouldn't characterize it as a second attempt at a chopstick land, that would just be a stretch goal. Who knows if it is, but it's consistent with how SpaceX operates.
No, but I'm neither omniscient nor able to see into the future. It's not clear to me that the sentence you're referring to had been posted 18 hours ago, and in any case, I hadn't seen it.
Most people like bass. Bose sells because normal people like the sound. Most people don’t really care and the choice is some random Amazon and Bose it’s probably going to win. My Bose Bluetooth lasted way longer than anker or other no name brands.
I wouldn’t say my Sonos speakers are good quality audio but it’s not bad. Plus, I can play music on 6 different speaker at the some time.
Maybe Bose can learn a thing or two and provide better quality across the line up.
You can’t drive a larger car on Medieval streets. US doesn’t have that problem. We also don’t like towing things like caravans and trailers behind sedans with bottomed out suspensions. BMW won’t even sell the EU stealth hitches in the US.
On the contrary, new england has plenty of tiny city streets, and assholes like my dad will still insist on driving their F350 (really) through the heart of downtown. Hell, we had the local cybertruck do it earlier this year.
They will spend all day griping about how hard it is to park in the city, and how much they hate the city.
I’ve take a mid 2000s Corolla and a 4Runner to 250k. The Corolla was still running with a slight radiator leak. The 4Runner had a transmission banging noise I didn’t want to fix.
No salt on my roads and little to no rust on either.
For anyone wondering, a distribution belt is the timing chair (or timing belt in this example). GM has a Duramax 3.0 diesel engine with a timing belt instead of a chain and it’s on the back. People were so angry GM put out a warranty for 5 year 100k miles.
I’ve seen tear downs on YouTube and the Duramax people are livid about a belt.
I think we're getting a little confused here. The Duramax 3.0 diesel has a timing chain, not a belt. The belt people usually bitch about is the oil pump belt.
BMW makes an PHEV X5 50e with about 30ish miles range and the B58 straight six. Most other options get a dinky little engine. The 5 series also has one that is just making its way to the US, 550e.
Typed this before I saw that you said expensive. I’ll leave my comment anyway.
I've found this example of a proven sabotage: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-21963100 which involved a few guys caught in the act less than 1 km from shore, then there are a lot of "suspicious" events where intention is never publicly proven.
Why did Europe need Russian gas at all, when there's clearly so much right under-foot? Obviously the 'invisible hand' of the market will fetch the gas from where it's fracked.
And lol, I did misread China for Cinia. oops.
But the argument is the same. The western govts. and media are filling everyone's head with 'evil Russian saboteur spyships' when there's no evidence of history, intent, or even capability.
I highly suspect this case will be a dragged net, or other 'normal' cause, but if it's malicious, imho the culprit is far more likely that nation that has it's fingers in everyone's pie, for commercial, geopolitical or political reasons.
For example, it wouldn't at all surprise me that they first escalated the Ukrain war by sanctioning a missile attack on Russia with their missiles, then cut some cables to make it look like Russian retaliation, priming us all for further escalation. Just cutting some cables does not seem like Russian mo to me.
Someone should escort the senile old cold-warmonger out of the whitehouse before the brass pupeteer him to escalate too far. I can imagine they're keen to see some 'decisive movement' before Trump shuts the show down.
Switched to edge at work and Safari at home/mobile hasn't been a huge issue. Firefox is my secondary. Although I no longer do much web debugging, the switch from edge to chrome wasn't too painful.
There’s exactly one company who can crack BMW ECUs. You have to send it to them and they have a Russian method to do it. Cough, cough, somebody hacked Bosch or BMW and grabbed the firmware keys.
They moved to Finland recently for obvious reasons.
I found quite a few devices for cars like that, just install this Russian or Chinese software to enable the real thing.
Depends on the type of ECU, if you have the tool to dump the firmware (via CAN or BDM/ JTAG) you send the file and they modify it, you just flash it back.
reply