« first day (468 days earlier)      last day (3468 days later) » 

2:27 AM
Did take my son to see if we could see it from the GW Bridge. Disappointed... Oh well.
 
 
10 hours later…
12:41 PM
Stu has removed an event from this room's schedule.
Stu has added an event to this room's schedule.
 
 
2 hours later…
2:28 PM
posted on October 28, 2014 by Josh Fuchs

How do the most massive stars explode? A new model of massive stars predicts new observational evidence.

 
3:15 PM
posted on October 28, 2014

This trick that the planet is looking back at you is actually a Hubble treat: An eerie, close-up view of Jupiter, the biggest planet in our solar system. Hubble was monitoring changes in Jupiter’s immense Great Red Spot (GRS) storm on April 21, 2014, when the shadow of the Jovian moon, Ganymede, swept across the center of the storm. This gave the giant planet the uncanny appearance of having a

 
 
1 hour later…
4:30 PM
LOL must be my favorite since the Procrastination SE proposal :)
 
I have not committed to any Area51 proposals in quite some time now. Space may have been my last one.
Nothing interesting to me coming up. Are many new sites coming online?
 
@geoffc Oh some of such make it till beta if they're not deleted by SE stuff before ... it's just some fun. And some others, well Beer isn't doing all that well. Frankly, I have accounts on 67 SE sites and barely find the time for about 3 of them.
 
I have 20+ and basically only follow Space these days.
I never got beyond 2600 points on the main SO site, even with 268 answers. Oh well. :) Fun to play, allows me to upvote when Google sends me there. :)
 
Didn't post anything on Information Security since September and even those last few were some rather fast answers. I'm mostly reviewing there and hanging out in the DMZ
I kinda gave up on SO ... I don't have any questions and I tired of sifting through loads of same old questions to find some good ones
So I'm in reality mostly just active here, on sec.se and on occasion on astronomy
the rest I'm interested in I just read through their weekly newsletters
 
Stu
5:14 PM
i have commited to the pastsa god.
 
Heathen!
 
 
2 hours later…
7:07 PM
Er, how do you get the nice neat superscript exponents in answers? I tried MathJax and it is overkill, i tried viewing the source and the superscript is there in the text sections too, mysteriously. I tried seeing if the ^ is interpreted as preceding a superscript, no...
 
@briligg If you consider MathJax an overkill then try <sup>superscript text here</sup> ... same for subscript with <sub></sub>. Basic HTML formatting like this is accepted in posts
 
It's overkill in this case - i know i asked for it but i just want to make a m^2
And i tried just using html ascii codes, and that worked too
 
Or for some other stuff you could get by with unicode ... like simple fractions, square and cube
 
Yeah, unicode, i guess that is what i meant
 
⅓⅔⅛⅜⅞⅝²³
 
7:12 PM
showoff...
 
Oh I could do better :P
 
That's okay... i'm impressed enough for now...
 
Ah, both have stuff i can use, thanks.
 
 
1 hour later…
8:35 PM
@Undo, you are correct, the Soyuz does have other emergency landing sites: svengrahn.pp.se/histind/Ugol/Ugol.html#Three%20main generally between 35n and 52n latitude; still cold. — Mazura 1 min ago
Am I missing something?
 
@Undo Yeah, your sombrero
 
@Undo That the guy never traveled farther than till the local deli? He's commenting on the weather in Kazakhstan and comes from Chicago? LOL
 
9:08 PM
Antares is pretty photogenic I've seen loads of nice photos of it
 
@TildalWave Really, I'm wondering if a Soyuz can land in warmer places.
I'm sure it can
 
Well it's equipped to deal with bears (has a gun) but not to deal with snakes or spiders (doesn't have antidotes) :)
 
Physically, can it? Like with trajectories and all that ;)
 
sure, anywhere along its ground track
 
thanks, I thought I'd gone loony ;)
 
9:12 PM
+/- some angle to it
anyway ...
 
Not like it matters, it's on World Building :P
 
my fav Antares launch photo so far
 
Ooooooooh
 
should be some good ones from today too since they moved the launch a bit earlier from yesterday ... should be some natural light still
there's still some light at 6:22 p.m. on the coast, right?
> Sunset: 18:07:05
 
Certainly
Sunsets are weird
 
9:19 PM
it's close enough to the sunset time so there should be some nice photos of the launch even from distance ... maybe HDR photos like the one I just posted
weather looks nice too
Antares / Orb-3 launch coverage in now webcast live on NASA TV
 
9:37 PM
I am going to try and get to the GW Bridge to watch again tonight. Dunno if it will work...
 
@geoffc good luck ;)
So, if you drop your cam from a GW Bridge pillar should you go looking for it in the GW Bush below it?
 
10:17 PM
T-5 min.
 
T-3
T-2
 
kinda late dusk I thought there's gonna be a bit more light than it is
 
I sort of did to
T-10 seconds
here we go
liftoff
 
shit
 
Uh oh
Dang
"Be advised, something just blew up"
 
Stu
10:24 PM
havent had one of those in a while
any initial ideas what went wrong?
 
true
 
How did I know that was going to happen?
 
dunno I had a feeling that there was quite a bit of gas coming out of the tunnel before launch but nobody said anything about it at the countdown so I thought well that's OK then
 
How do you put out a liquid oxygen fire?
 
you wait?
 
10:26 PM
Eventually they have to replay it, that was insane.
Dangit.
 
oh it's gonna be all over the net
in quad HD
 
@TildalWave see TL
The #Antares launch has failed. http://t.co/4GS01dK1wM
A little bit of an understatement
I'm still shaky
Those poor people that pushed the button
 
Stu
me too. i wonder if one of the Aerojet engines failed.
look like it chocked 2-3 seconds in
 
I thought it was going up rather slowly, then all hell broke loose
but I thought "meh, rockets are big and they tend to look like they're slow"
well... who wants to write the question?
 
I have no idea what you space people are talking about but an explosion just happened.
 
10:31 PM
My witness statement: "it got fifty feet in the air and blew up, causing everything to catch fire"
2
 
judging by photos it looks like one of AJ26-62 blew up
followed by rapid unplanned disassembly
people on that boat that was in the safety zone yesterday will be really relieved that they scrubbed it for a day
2
 
"antares ex" already autocompletes
 
Stu
maybe the boat from yesterday was trying to tell us something
 
@TildalWave It looks like it all came down right smack dab on the beach, though.
 
10:35 PM
Jeez who's trigger-happy on the star button? :)
 
like, on top of all the expensive stuff
 
Stu
i am the trigger happy star giver
 
Watch as google.com/… suddenly becomes full of stuff
 
My thought is that one of the AJ26-62 fuel lines sprung a leak which caused at first lower thrust (slow clearing of TEL), then gave up and blew up the rest via a burn on the side of one of the nozzles
could also explain lots of gas (what I thought was a bit much for nitrogen purging alone) coming from the exhaust deflection tunnel
 
They should have seen that, though
 
10:39 PM
but if it's anywhere close to what I'm describing then I fail to know how come they missed that
exactly
unless ...
 
If I could tell...
granted, I thought it was fine but I had a terrible feeling about it
 
Stu
it could have been as simple as a foreign object inside the combustion chamber
 
loose wrench
 
Cygnus CRS Orb-3, also known as Orbital Sciences CRS Flight 3 or Orbital 3 (Orb-3), is the fourth planned flight of the Orbital Sciences' Cygnus automated cargo spacecraft, its fourth flight to the International Space Station and the fifth launch of the company's Antares launch vehicle. However, launch was unsuccessful, exploding and crashing back onto the pad approximately 6 seconds after launch. == Spacecraft == This is the third of eight flights by Orbital Sciences under the Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA. This will be the first flight of the Antares 130, which uses a more...
wow. Wikipedia updates quickly.
 
magic of The Internet™
 
Stu
10:41 PM
any replays yet?
 
he said a foreign object :P
 
Dangit - I got in too late for spectacularness?
@TildalWave loose spanner
 
@RoryAlsop spectacularness will be all over the Interwebs shortly. Please hold.
 
We call spanner wrenches "a French" here, that'd be foreign :P
 
Seeing it live is... more shocking
 
10:42 PM
@RoryAlsop I read that as spammer... and then I realized we weren't in any spam-handling room. :P
 
@hichris123 pfffft
@Undo nah - that just gets you the 2012 Antares explosion
(little one)
;-P
 
Looking forward to all the videos on YouTube blaming aliens and zooming in on distant wildlife as proof
 
it's actually worth watching
 
@RoryAlsop That guy must have been working hard on that tire pump :P
 
@Undo heh - 9.6 bar!
 
10:45 PM
Oooh, it had classified stuff
 
Stu
there you go
 
Wait, what are they doing with "classified crypto equipment"
?
 
@hichris123 Look at the edit history! They were just waiting to update: en.wikipedia.org/w/…
 
class 5 crypto equipment
 
that does look like a lot of gas/condensation...
 
10:47 PM
The export of cryptography from the United States is the transfer from the United States to another country of devices and technology related to cryptography. Very strict export restriction which existed until 1992, and were gradually eased until 2000, but some restrictions still remain. Since World War II, many governments, including the U.S. and its NATO allies, have regulated the export of cryptography for national security considerations, and, as late as 1992, cryptography was on the U.S. Munitions List as an Auxiliary Military Technology. In light of the enormous impact of cryptanalysis in...
look under classification
 
@Stu okay - it's not good, but boy was that explosion pretty!
 
@Stu That is... an exceptionally large explosion
 
No one died, that's good
 
Stu
anyone know what was on board?
 
Stu
10:54 PM
"procedure books"
all those cubesats >.<
Planetary Resources satellite as well
 
@Stu That's almost the most sickening part of it
Oh, they weren't made by kids. That's better
There was some stuff made by some college students
 
well it's gonna be an interesting post-launch news conference that's for sure
 
> A mishap occurred shortly after liftoff
Seems like a little bit of an understatement.
 
Got to love the "Avionics power nominal" right as the rocket starts falling down...
 
yup
 
11:09 PM
OK who's gonna write the rep train question then?
 
Why did a guy say "Avionics power nominal" right as the rocket blew up?
Is 108% nominal power for the rocket?
 
it might have been?
 
@PearsonArtPhoto yeah, my guess is it was, it looks like something blew up near the bottom of the rocket causing it to lose thrust and then fall back down
 
@PearsonArtPhoto Avionics is just the computers running the rockets, right?
 
wouldn't that merely say that avionics is powered up properly on internal power?
 
11:12 PM
Avionics could mean a lot of things.
 
So there was good power to the computers. He never said anything about the rocket not beginning negative acceleration
 
@Undo so atleast we know they should have had nice telemetry from the crash
 
@AJHenderson They should
 
It usually refers to the control mechanisms.
That could be another good question...
 
well all the actuators, sensors and the flight computer on the first stage ... dunno which ones he was referring to
 
11:14 PM
Your task, should you choose to accept it. Find a question that will hit the super collider from this disaster.
 
I'm on it!
 
@PearsonArtPhoto nit: it's not the supercollider anymore. It's a sidebar thingy.
 
i.e. it still does all the damage of a SuperCollider but now comes with a less ominous name?
 
I suppose so.
It's a bit site specific, I think. I don't really understand it at all now...
Still, we should be able to get a question on there...
0
Q: What entails "Avionics" on the the Antares rocket?

PearsonArtPhotoIn today's crash, seen below, there was a control operator who stated, right as the rocket blew up, "Avionics Power nominal". What does that mean exactly? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjrqN02gUdk

 
here, have a +1
 
11:17 PM
it is almost spooky how smoothly that thing fell back down after the engine blew up
 
+1 ALL THE THINGS!
 
It's wierd. I think there was an overpressure event, or maybe the engine melted?
 
@AJHenderson yup it didn't lose all its thrust at once it almost came down gracefully
 
good demonstration of why a crew capsule escape rocket is a good idea, cause if that had been manned and had a crew capsule escape rocket, it would have had plenty of time to fire and get them the hell out of dodge
 
0
Q: Why did a flight controller say "Avionics power nominal" right before Antares exploded?

UndoThe Antares rocket carrying Cygnus just exploded. A video is available here, explosion at around 3:00. In the video, right as the rocket begins to slide down and explode, a flight controller says "Avionics power nominal". This is the scene when he begins his sentence: It would seem that nothi...

 
11:20 PM
@TildalWave almost looked like a fairly "minor" failure in the engine causing loss of thrust and the main explosion was just the thing's fuel tanks rupturing
 
@PearsonArtPhoto ... hey
Beat me to it.
 
Two related, but distinct questions.
 
I'll trim mine to not infringe on yours
 
When do they activate range safety? I mean, it doesn't make sense to use it this early in the flight, but from when does? Is that something that could be described in a general sense or is too system specific?
 
Range safety usually doesn't apply to this kind of thing...
 
11:22 PM
I know, but since when into the flight it does?
e.g. when it's out of the safety zone?
I don't remember if they activated it during the Proton-M explosion in mid 2013
didn't look like they did
 
This was the worst though...
 
Well not counting all the Chinese failures, one of those cost up to 300 lives on the ground according to some sources. Plus, they used to build space launch complexes close to cities
 
I know someone who used to work at the Cape. That launch basically destroyed all of the cars in the parking lot...
I guess the military ended up paying for them all.
 
Gosh, seems to me like a much more general question about the accident would draw more traffic...
i still hate seeing things like that. it makes me sad somehow.
 
11:37 PM
go ahead and ask it
I can't think of a good one for this failure but I do have a few others in mind re previous failures I didn't yet have the time for. For the Galileo sats that are now in wrong orbit I can't think of a way to ask it without it being primarily opinion based or too broad. But I'll think of a way
post-launch news conference was postponed, no new date yet
@briligg "most likely" is "primarily opinion based" it might be better simply asking about the true cause and waiting till it's established
 
hmmm... maybe i can do something about that
 
problem is, until that is done you wouldn't know which answer is better ... it's anyone's guess for now
@briligg just remove the "most likely" part and it should be OK
Oh and the question's body ... well, that needs a bit more rewriting LOL
 
too conversational, huh?
 
yup for a Q&A site it is
kinda the same as why I can't think of a way to ask about possible uses of the two Galileo sats in wrong orbits ... how would I identify the most correct answer?
 
a small set of possible correct answers isn't enough?
 
11:51 PM
I think the new revision is acceptable. You're basically asking what to look for when analyzing the video of a failed launch
 
Yes - exactly! maybe i should say it that way somewhere.
speaking of which, is launch-failure the tag to use, or is there something that covers that?
 
you already do in your last paragraph ... if you'll get some close votes just put that in bold and you should be fine ;)
@briligg tags you used are fine IMO
actually don't we already have ?
yup :)
I'll just make it a synonym then shall I?
 
@TildalWave could it make a difference if people search exactly for 'launch failure'? which people might...
i have no idea how that part works. synonym then.
 
We can always change that so they're standalone. Point of tags is to organize things around and make it simpler to search for related questions. If some tag gets "a life of its own" later on then it would make sense to make it a standalone tag, otherwise it IMHO makes more sense if it's synonymized with a tag that has a wider meaning (and more questions)
 

« first day (468 days earlier)      last day (3468 days later) »