search results matching tag: Scott Manley
» channel: motorsports
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
- 1
Videos (19) | Sift Talk (0) | Blogs (0) | Comments (4) |
- 1
Videos (19) | Sift Talk (0) | Blogs (0) | Comments (4) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
NASA's outdated SLS. Why does it exist?
"NASA's new rocket has been in development for over a decade, arguably it's a soft continuation from the Constellation program using the 5 segment boosters and Orion capsule that began development in 2005. It's been a slow, expensive ride with the contractors milking their cost plus contracts for their own benefit."
-Scott Manley
Makes it seem like NASA SLS is just providing jobs and not actually producing anything of value for each dollar spent. More telescopes, less rockets?
Nasa don't give them reasons to cut your budget or make politicians/public think you're less or unnecessary.
*promote the upcoming launch.
SpinLaunch Engineering Doc - Throwing Satellites into Space?
I would like to see this succeed, and after seeing this video I have a bit more optimism, but it's still a lot of hurdles to overcome. And if they have an accident (release timing error > 1ms), will do major damage to their launch chamber, probably taking months of repairs to recover from. Whereas SpaceX is almost proud of their rocket failures...
I was pessimistic a few months back, after seeing Thunderfoot's "busted" videos about Spinlaunch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ziGI0i9VbE ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE ; but his analysis is much more "armchair" whereas Brian was actually there on-site and has more (previously unpublished) information.
Scott Manley also did a video about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAczd3mt3X0&t=4s
but it's more of a "how it works" and has a lot of overlap of info with the above Real Engineering video.
Nasa Astra Test Flight Goes sideways
Love Scott Manley, but not sure why he's started trying to add comedy bits to his videos... stick to the rocket science.
Good explanation though- 1 of 5 engines failed, so instead of thrust:weight ratio being 1.25, it was 1.0. Only when it burned enough fuel did it get light enough to start lifting.
Could've ended much worse.
Why
SpaceX Starship Test Flight | SN10 sticks the landing
Check out Scott Manley's breakdown of the landing. There where 2 wee little landing legs that did not lock, which meant the skirt hit the ground on the hard bounce. Damage happened, leaks ensued, kablooey.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF9mdMI1qxM&ab_channel=ScottManley
Landing rockets is hard. Really hard. Make your brain hurt from thinking hard. I wonder what actually happened? Sounds like the post-landing fuel venting--created a pool of explosive vapor and stuff came in contact with an ignition source?
Next time it lands, I'm sure we'll see it bathed in a fine aqueous mist.