SpaceX won't land off the Australian coast for Recovery. They'll do the burn sooner and land at Diego Garcia, a US base. They could do a landing at a tower, or park a barge in the lagoon.
I think we will find that humans are already multi planetary! I believe humans ruined Mars and moved to Earth. That explains everything from pyramids and lots of other thing's that don't make any sense otherwise. I think Genius people are too smart to have common sense. It's life, not science.
if memory serves, It survived to, was it, within 1000 pressure cycles of the estimated failure point? They just hadn't bothered to do that math until after an aircraft vanished in the middle of a radio transmission.
It was the Comet. Square windows had been fine on pressurised piston engined airliners, but the higher altitudes and higher speeds of a jet meant the pressure cycles were larger and more frequent.
I don't think we even need inflating stations anymore now we have very large diameter rockets coming online. A modified starship would be more than wide enough for a station
Don't forget back in the '60s Woomera was the biggest space and missile test site outside the two superpowers. Two satellites were launched from there and one (Propero) is still in orbit.
@@malcolmstreet1 That's an amazing fact. I'm really keen to see a rocket launch or landing. If I don't have to leave Australia for it, that would be awesome!
Since when did NASA decide to use Sierra Space to make a space station? Last I heard NASA is building a lunar space station that does not use these inflatables and has no plans for a LEO space station. The only station I have heard of using these inflatables is a private station being made by Sierra Space and Blue Origin.
Good idea! Like setting your tent up, in outer space. Lightweight and easy to transport. You can haul the equipment and supplies in subsequent missions. Build the house and then furnish it.
They are not using a 50 cal. They are using light gas guns (LGG) which accelerate projectiles to speeds of 7.6 km/s or more, that's 9 times faster than the muzzle velocity of a 50 BMG which means that a projectile from a LGG has 81 times more energy than a 50 BMG per weight basis and more importantly the terminal ballistics are very different at those speeds even plasma and ionization become a thing.
I just wish space travel wasn't fraught with so much peril. There's a vast cosmos out there to explore and we're stuck here on this tiny little grain of sand.
This photo at 10:15 looks similar to melted metal caused by welding. The flecks of green material look welded into place. The entire reddish area may have been melted at the same time. It would have been a gigantic kind of welding arc reaching between planets. Man, what a show that must have been!
For starters it was Meant to explode. They are testing inflatable modules hence they filled with air at presures Far beyond manufactured design limits.
Micrometeor and space debris damage to ISS have done more damage over the years than was expected and is why planned deorbital demolition. Any inflatable module will have a short lifespan, not permanent.
As the saying goes, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet. So, I don't care if it explodes 100 times while they perfect the design. I would rather see that happen in testing on the ground rather than as it deploys in SPACE!
Title and opening script is troublesome, as mainstream media will see 'exploded' and assume failure. And this was no fialure in any way. Both "Test to Destruct" events have been massive successes, thanks to how far Sierra have exceeded the design specifications.
It seems curious that the inflatable space has a square blank plate, suggesting they're going to have square windows. It's long been known the circular windows or portholes are far less susceptible to sudden catastrophic failure so it seems a strange choice to make.
They should land the ship on a drone ship and tow it back so you can get hands on and a visual of what is left after re-entry because things can be missed based on computer data
This is misleading In that NASA is NOT shooting a 50-cal bullet at this structure, with equivalent mass and energy. The gas gun has an aperture which allows a small "particle" to free fly through the vacuum barrel at varying speeds and energies. We had such guns for hyper-velocity physics studies, and achieved speeds well in excess of 50,000 FPS for various material studies, and re-entry simulations. Our guns had 6+inch openings, and allowed larger objects to go through, which resulted in better modeling. However, this required a massive propulsion system, and as a result, most normal use systems use a smaller barrel opening, and shorter distances, so that don't need massive facilities like our range, which was a several hundred foot long building...
i think they has to add multiple pressure layer for reliability and ability to fix one layer if ie inner layer damaged and there is space vetween outer and inner pressure layers it can be fixed withing by using outer barrier as shield while inner layer is daaged... ie layers with service space layer and can be kept reliable by using a bridge pressure layer ... so that the stress will be minimal as pressure difference will be lower compared to one pressure layer editions..
I knew bob Bigalow he used to explain his research with me there is no such thing as bad publicity just brings world wide knowledge to your organization
Huge areas of Australia are empty, empty, empty. Why land in the sea or further away in the ocean? Nuclear bombs were set off over land. SharShip is was less of a blast that a nuc.
Ok, great. But I have yet to see them fire something at it that would represent a tiny particle travelling at speed hitting the thing. Even a flake of paint travelling around the earth can cause serious damage to the space station, so what would be the effect of it hitting a highly pressured vessel?
Same as it would be for an aluminum one. A small one would just make a small hole, which they would notice from gradual loss of pressure, find the leak, and put a piece of tape over it temporarily. Get up into bigger pieces that weigh ounces and are measured in inches and could definitely be catastrophic. it’s also not a highly pressurized vessel, it’s about 15 psi.
The balloon habitats are hopeful due to low cost for the high internal volume. I suppose a protective cube-like framework around the balloon can be covered with impact proof carbon fiber panels. Dr. Robert Murray Smith here on TH-cam invented a high impact carbonfiber plastic-like material. This can protect the balloon from small meteorites , space debris, and possible accidental collisions, fender benders and-or rocket exhaust.
How the shells are build. I just remember in an old scientific amer an article, which says one of the Most stable Material ist when ist knitted, i.e knitted Carbon faser
Unless they make them with Faux gravity, it's pointless. All future stations ships should have them in various sizes, or something like the craft in The Martian or Interstellar, so a waste of time, especially for long journeys.
And there is a reason for the planned explosion. Just because NASA says one thing does not mean that SpaceX agrees and does its own design, materials, and testing.
did they do the test in a vacuum? I'm curious if that 14psi atmospheric pressure on the outside of the chamber would help and influence the test in a way that when in space it would be weaker than expected? Could be a non issue, just curious.
starship as a miltary point to point cargo rocket is such an absurd idea you could shoot one down with small arms fire , - ther presurised flying fuel tanks made of paper thin steel - and were could it even land ? or be refuled to take off again -
Anyone tested this on Kentucky ballistics range ? To test for micro meteorites ? Just think a grain of sand doing 10 miles a second is more than a 50 cal doing it's speed. Try it out and see how it goes please
5:40 ...And you know just how he'd do it: One (or two) giant cargo ships loaded with 90% of the components, tanks, towers, sections of high bay(s), all that plumbing, pre assembled into units, and most of the launch facility including prefabricated concrete panels, etc.. And then a month or two preparing a site, then a month or two to assemble Starbase South... We already know he loves doing outrageous tech bro stunts in Australia! It could also be the sort of thing where he just buys SpaceX a retired cargo container ship and refit it to carry all the oddball chunks and bits (the awkward children of Starbase). Might as well put a Starship assembly line on an additional ship and send that down under too. 😎
Mmmm but your forgetting that NASA has heavy involvement with the Australian Space program as is, we operate basically in conjunction with NASA so I feel that its not really tech exporting or however you want to frame it….
Why would you put a window in this module when you can just glue a wireless camera to see outside. Yes a arm/robot mount is useful but why weaken the shell for a silly window?
You know, I can’t recall ever hearing why NASA is so interested in finding life on Mars or any other place other than earth. We’re spending a pile of money on this search, and the question is, why?
Because “scientists” need a job. After all of the training, there is no unemployment office job description box to check. Create something for them to do, if NASA doesn’t use all of the funds it receives then they will be defunded. That’s just how it is with agencies. They have to ask for more as if they’re on to something really really important. Good luck🌸
Bigelow aerospace already did this a few years ago. Why start all over from the ground up. Just delays things. Bigelow already has a module attached to the space station for some time now. They should have just acquired Bigelow rather than delaying everything by starting over.
This is good science, which requires testing to verify limits. We don't need ridiculous, sensationalist titles to garner our interest. Please give interested viewers a little more credit than you would expect from the average Tik Tok viewer.
Vectran? Really? Its limitations seem like a deal killer to me. It is only good up to a bit over 200°C, *and* it has big problems with UV radiation making it weaker and brittle. These are both *major* problems in space, where 200°C and higher is very common at our distance from the Sun. An alternative that is far more durable is basalt fibers. Most variants have working temps up to 1000°C with some recipes maxxing out at 1200°C. Also UV radiation does nothing to basalt fibers. Basalt fiber is significantly stronger than either kevlar (which is even worse than vectran for melting and UV exposure) or vectran. Basalt fiber exhibits the highest tensile strength among the three, with a value of 4,800 MPa. Kevlar fiber has a tensile strength of 3,620 MPa, which is significantly lower than Basalt but higher than Vectran. Vectran fiber has a tensile strength of approximately 2,300 MPa, which is lower than both Basalt and Kevlar.
'Launching multiple satellites/ISS in orbit or in outer space means more traffic jam and hindrance in space. It may affect launhing of spacecrafts towards lunar surface or another planets. Also such types of serial launching of satellites in outer space is cause of pollution and collusions. Humanity to raise its permanent base/ space station on Lunar surface only by using advanced spacecrafts to reach their within couple of hours.
LOL Crunchy... your teeth would be what breaks though. Olivine is a mineral made of magnesium iron silicate with the chemical formula (Mg,Fe)2SiO4. It is a type of nesosilicate or orthosilicate. The primary component of the Earth's upper mantle,[9] it is a common mineral in Earth's subsurface, but weathers quickly on the surface. Olivine has many uses, such as the gemstone peridot (or chrysolite), as well as industrial applications like metalworking processes.
It would be vastly safer if the failure weren’t so violent. If you get ruptured by too much pressure, it should be repairable. Catastrophic failure really isn’t an option.
At 76 psi a crew would be long dead anyway. However, I'm pretty sure this test was to see, if the thing is as strong as it's supposed to be, not to prove it against pressures on-board systems probably wouldn't be able to produce anyway.
Another reason to not want explosive failure is space debris. Yes these are vast hypotheticals given the pressure needed to burst the habitat, but it’s not a bad design principle for space craft in general - don’t fail violently.
Sign up for the weekly Space Race newsletter here: www.thespacerace.news/subscribe
It's not Nasa that developed this, but Sierraspace. So it's not Nasas habitat.
SpaceX won't land off the Australian coast for Recovery. They'll do the burn sooner and land at Diego Garcia, a US base. They could do a landing at a tower, or park a barge in the lagoon.
your map of the US at 4:55 goes well into Canada, at least on the west coast
We're gonna find life on MARS before GTA VI
i hope so
I think we will find that humans are already multi planetary! I believe humans ruined Mars and moved to Earth. That explains everything from pyramids and lots of other thing's that don't make any sense otherwise. I think Genius people are too smart to have common sense. It's life, not science.
I seriously doubt it.
id be pleased
Idk man they say it every time but that is false lol
Naughty, naughty title! 😂
This is a spectacular result.
The size of a house!
True 😁
Yup, but I'll forgive them.
*MMOD? - massive multiplayer orbital dormitory.*
*what's your superhero name? - atomic oxygen.*
Reminds me of the problem with an airplane: you do not incorporate square holes. The British had a nice plane, it didn't survive...
if memory serves, It survived to, was it, within 1000 pressure cycles of the estimated failure point? They just hadn't bothered to do that math until after an aircraft vanished in the middle of a radio transmission.
@@Relkond The square windows cracked at the corners!
It was the Comet. Square windows had been fine on pressurised piston engined airliners, but the higher altitudes and higher speeds of a jet meant the pressure cycles were larger and more frequent.
I don't think we even need inflating stations anymore now we have very large diameter rockets coming online. A modified starship would be more than wide enough for a station
There was a similar type of sharp corner flaw in the design of the Titanic's hull that contributed to the ship breaking apart easier.
What matters is not burst pressure but chance of bursting after UV exposure and atomic oxygen and micro meteoroids all in combination.
weve been weeving baskets for 1000s of years and now were weeving balloons for space.....
As an Australian. It would be incredible to see a spacex launch from my country. I hope this goes ahead.
Don't forget back in the '60s Woomera was the biggest space and missile test site outside the two superpowers. Two satellites were launched from there and one (Propero) is still in orbit.
@@malcolmstreet1 That's an amazing fact. I'm really keen to see a rocket launch or landing. If I don't have to leave Australia for it, that would be awesome!
It’d be More Likely the U.S. turning Australia into another Ukraine via another of it’s Proxy Wars.
Come to nz. Normal event . Lol.
Australia does not exist , it's all big conspiracy maaaate 😃😃🍻🍻
Why risk a window failure when you can just mount cameras outside and video screen inside?
Good point
I guess bc windows are nicer and if it's possible to make a window without it weakening the structural integrity, might as well do it
The article also said the test was to check if the mounting plate for a robotic arm would hold.
And for the look,just paint windows in 3d! 😅
Yeah it wasn't just to see if a window can be there but other things that could be useful.
Congratulations on 300k subscribers! I love your channel!
Thank you!
I can’t believe a cord of wood just fell on my feet
u good homie?
@@superintendent1152 no, but I’m fine. Just won’t be using my gyroscopic lucky mood watch for a week or a day. Thanks for asking yo!
thought this was a re upload until i read the last part of the title hahaha
me too
Looks like Sierra Space is doing a bit more testing than the goofballs at OceanGate.
Since when did NASA decide to use Sierra Space to make a space station? Last I heard NASA is building a lunar space station that does not use these inflatables and has no plans for a LEO space station. The only station I have heard of using these inflatables is a private station being made by Sierra Space and Blue Origin.
NASA has already invested 172$ million into Orbital Reef so that they can use it after the ISS is gone
@@TheSpaceRaceYT Oh, interesting I did not realise that.
Please make a vid about this news, thanks.@@TheSpaceRaceYT
Good idea! Like setting your tent up, in outer space. Lightweight and easy to transport. You can haul the equipment and supplies in subsequent missions. Build the house and then furnish it.
Yes, it's made of indestructible polythene, specially designed to land on the Moon, and the Sun (At Night).
They made the patch....square? The mad lads!
The bit you see is square.. The bit you don't see is???
For record it cost 100 Billion to build the ISS with 10 modules.
This single module holds as much internal volume as Half the station......
Mr, Tagert I think they had to meny beans.
Let’s hurry up and get those space bugs back here. 😂😂😂
They are not using a 50 cal. They are using light gas guns (LGG) which accelerate projectiles to speeds of 7.6 km/s or more, that's 9 times faster than the muzzle velocity of a 50 BMG which means that a projectile from a LGG has 81 times more energy than a 50 BMG per weight basis and more importantly the terminal ballistics are very different at those speeds even plasma and ionization become a thing.
I loved the picture of the robot driving on mars!! So adorable
I just wish space travel wasn't fraught with so much peril.
There's a vast cosmos out there to explore and we're stuck here on this tiny little grain of sand.
5:50 Looks like a sci-fi prediction of the 1970s. Don't hold your breath.
This photo at 10:15 looks similar to melted metal caused by welding. The flecks of green material look welded into place. The entire reddish area may have been melted at the same time. It would have been a gigantic kind of welding arc reaching between planets. Man, what a show that must have been!
Same Biglow Aerospace didn't survive. They would be the ones doing this.
no one can survive space
@@williamcase426 Not even Cheech and Chong? Space Coke!
@@k.sullivan6303 no one
For starters it was Meant to explode. They are testing inflatable modules hence they filled with air at presures Far beyond manufactured design limits.
Seeing all of this only increases my admiration for Subnautica.
Micrometeor and space debris damage to ISS have done more damage over the years than was expected and is why planned deorbital demolition. Any inflatable module will have a short lifespan, not permanent.
As the saying goes, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet. So, I don't care if it explodes 100 times while they perfect the design. I would rather see that happen in testing on the ground rather than as it deploys in SPACE!
Title and opening script is troublesome, as mainstream media will see 'exploded' and assume failure. And this was no fialure in any way. Both "Test to Destruct" events have been massive successes, thanks to how far Sierra have exceeded the design specifications.
How will it's the habitat? Hold up under pressure from the inside, making it a very type on and be hit by a rock on your outside
I’m confused why spacex is even messing around with Australia. Just land the rocket near Hawaii
The old story: If scientists say, there is a hint that something could be done, journalists sell it as a fact.
WTF am I doing here, waiting for the space hotel in 2027 that's now a "maybe" in 2030? lmao
Who needs all of that when you have ai and the internet lol
Ecology of reefs off the coast of Australia may be problematic.
Life on earth found by Viking landers in the 70s. Both landers, same bacterial life signatures.
It seems curious that the inflatable space has a square blank plate, suggesting they're going to have square windows. It's long been known the circular windows or portholes are far less susceptible to sudden catastrophic failure so it seems a strange choice to make.
NASA is one of the PR sources for maintaining the myth that the US is the world's leader in R&D of new technology.
I keep wondering if these "balloons" could be used to establish underwater colonies as well?
They should land the ship on a drone ship and tow it back so you can get hands on and a visual of what is left after re-entry because things can be missed based on computer data
May the power of Vectran bring prosperity to your house!
This is misleading In that NASA is NOT shooting a 50-cal bullet at this structure, with equivalent mass and energy. The gas gun has an aperture which allows a small "particle" to free fly through the vacuum barrel at varying speeds and energies. We had such guns for hyper-velocity physics studies, and achieved speeds well in excess of 50,000 FPS for various material studies, and re-entry simulations. Our guns had 6+inch openings, and allowed larger objects to go through, which resulted in better modeling. However, this required a massive propulsion system, and as a result, most normal use systems use a smaller barrel opening, and shorter distances, so that don't need massive facilities like our range, which was a several hundred foot long building...
i think they has to add multiple pressure layer for reliability and ability to fix one layer if ie inner layer damaged and there is space vetween outer and inner pressure layers it can be fixed withing by using outer barrier as shield while inner layer is daaged... ie layers with service space layer and can be kept reliable by using a bridge pressure layer ... so that the stress will be minimal as pressure difference will be lower compared to one pressure layer editions..
I knew bob Bigalow he used to explain his research with me there is no such thing as bad publicity just brings world wide knowledge to your organization
Of note is that both times it didn't rupture at the plate either.
Huge areas of Australia are empty, empty, empty.
Why land in the sea or further away in the ocean?
Nuclear bombs were set off over land. SharShip is was less of a blast that a nuc.
My bicycle's tires are rated for 200 psi, but perhaps that is not a fair or valid comparison.
Ok, great. But I have yet to see them fire something at it that would represent a tiny particle travelling at speed hitting the thing. Even a flake of paint travelling around the earth can cause serious damage to the space station, so what would be the effect of it hitting a highly pressured vessel?
Same as it would be for an aluminum one. A small one would just make a small hole, which they would notice from gradual loss of pressure, find the leak, and put a piece of tape over it temporarily. Get up into bigger pieces that weigh ounces and are measured in inches and could definitely be catastrophic. it’s also not a highly pressurized vessel, it’s about 15 psi.
Such as at around 2:32?
The balloon habitats are hopeful due to low cost for the high internal volume. I suppose a protective cube-like framework around the balloon can be covered with impact proof carbon fiber panels. Dr. Robert Murray Smith here on TH-cam invented a high impact carbonfiber plastic-like material. This can protect the balloon from small meteorites , space debris, and possible accidental collisions, fender benders and-or rocket exhaust.
That 50call rifle looked more like an air cannon just saying
How the shells are build. I just remember in an old scientific amer an article, which says one of the Most stable Material ist when ist knitted, i.e knitted Carbon faser
Unless they make them with Faux gravity, it's pointless. All future stations ships should have them in various sizes, or something like the craft in The Martian or Interstellar, so a waste of time, especially for long journeys.
Windows... are not an essential design feature. Camera... Monitor...
This is why we're doomed as a species.
And there is a reason for the planned explosion. Just because NASA says one thing does not mean that SpaceX agrees and does its own design, materials, and testing.
did they do the test in a vacuum? I'm curious if that 14psi atmospheric pressure on the outside of the chamber would help and influence the test in a way that when in space it would be weaker than expected? Could be a non issue, just curious.
starship as a miltary point to point cargo rocket is such an absurd idea you could shoot one down with small arms fire , - ther presurised flying fuel tanks made of paper thin steel - and were could it even land ? or be refuled to take off again -
Anyone tested this on Kentucky ballistics range ? To test for micro meteorites ?
Just think a grain of sand doing 10 miles a second is more than a 50 cal doing it's speed.
Try it out and see how it goes please
They have known about ancient life on Mars for decades.
The USA signed an OK to export our rockets to AU a year ago.
2:36 .50 calibre is 18-20 kilojoules of energy .
Good video. Very informative. Thanks, SR!
Why not bring samples back just to space station first for preliminary study. Then they could return on a crew change over flight as needed?
Contamination
You can’t land rockets in reefs of the cost Australia, there protected areas.
Balloon space house scary! 🥺
5:40 ...And you know just how he'd do it: One (or two) giant cargo ships loaded with 90% of the components, tanks, towers, sections of high bay(s), all that plumbing, pre assembled into units, and most of the launch facility including prefabricated concrete panels, etc.. And then a month or two preparing a site, then a month or two to assemble Starbase South... We already know he loves doing outrageous tech bro stunts in Australia! It could also be the sort of thing where he just buys SpaceX a retired cargo container ship and refit it to carry all the oddball chunks and bits (the awkward children of Starbase).
Might as well put a Starship assembly line on an additional ship and send that down under too. 😎
Mmmm but your forgetting that NASA has heavy involvement with the Australian Space program as is, we operate basically in conjunction with NASA so I feel that its not really tech exporting or however you want to frame it….
Impressive, saves bringing the astronauts back.
On earth it needs a lot more pressure to stay inflated than in space
What about shooting it when under pressure?
Why would you put a window in this module when you can just glue a wireless camera to see outside. Yes a arm/robot mount is useful but why weaken the shell for a silly window?
I hope Australia doesn't let them do this because its not good for the delicate ecosystem
Was the balloon contractor wham-o? Just asking if they were the low bidder or Boeing again
You know, I can’t recall ever hearing why NASA is so interested in finding life on Mars or any other place other than earth. We’re spending a pile of money on this search, and the question is, why?
Because “scientists” need a job. After all of the training, there is no unemployment office job description box to check. Create something for them to do, if NASA doesn’t use all of the funds it receives then they will be defunded. That’s just how it is with agencies. They have to ask for more as if they’re on to something really really important. Good luck🌸
Nasa make good tshirts.
I wonder what the burst strength of metal space station modules is.
All of the Wall Street NASA investors got duped in to buying a huge septic tank With a helicopter jet engine on it 😂
I don't know about this thing. I know it tests well but can't help thinking they are missing something 🤔
Bigelow aerospace already did this a few years ago. Why start all over from the ground up. Just delays things. Bigelow already has a module attached to the space station for some time now. They should have just acquired Bigelow rather than delaying everything by starting over.
If I had the ability to reclaim a SpaceX rocket/any rocket components from the ocean, what rules if any would prevent or limit me doing so?
SpaceX should build space facilities at Cape York in Australia, there ain't no FAA there.
This is good science, which requires testing to verify limits. We don't need ridiculous, sensationalist titles to garner our interest. Please give interested viewers a little more credit than you would expect from the average Tik Tok viewer.
A septic tank has higher blowout pressure than that cheap piece of shit 😂
By space they mean on a balloon in the sky
Vectran is not just made for outer space.
Not a fan of inflatables in space. Reminds me of Oceangate. Go with stainless!
how would you fit that in a rocket-
@@aienthusiast618 *disassembled*
@@aienthusiast618 The upper stage of Starship could either carry it up as payload, or a modified Starship could actually be the station.
@@mikehawes2 fair
Nice, cool, and clean report.thank you!😊
Vectran? Really? Its limitations seem like a deal killer to me. It is only good up to a bit over 200°C, *and* it has big problems with UV radiation making it weaker and brittle. These are both *major* problems in space, where 200°C and higher is very common at our distance from the Sun.
An alternative that is far more durable is basalt fibers. Most variants have working temps up to 1000°C with some recipes maxxing out at 1200°C. Also UV radiation does nothing to basalt fibers. Basalt fiber is significantly stronger than either kevlar (which is even worse than vectran for melting and UV exposure) or vectran.
Basalt fiber exhibits the highest tensile strength among the three, with a value of 4,800 MPa.
Kevlar fiber has a tensile strength of 3,620 MPa, which is significantly lower than Basalt but higher than Vectran.
Vectran fiber has a tensile strength of approximately 2,300 MPa, which is lower than both Basalt and Kevlar.
This is so cool to see.
I don't even see the point in having a space station
There is life where there is funding 😎
With a starship @ 9m, why bother unless you plan to build a much larger than 9m station?
They've got some future concepts that go up to 19 meters diameter inflated, using the 9 meter Starship fairing to launch
'Launching multiple satellites/ISS in orbit or in outer space means more traffic jam and hindrance in space. It may affect launhing of spacecrafts towards lunar surface or another planets. Also such types of serial launching of satellites in outer space is cause of pollution and collusions. Humanity to raise its permanent base/ space station on Lunar surface only by using advanced spacecrafts to reach their within couple of hours.
NASA is still using imperial measurements? Some never learn.
Olivine? Probably nice on Greek Salad.
Obviously Popeye was from Mars then.
LOL Crunchy... your teeth would be what breaks though.
Olivine is a mineral made of magnesium iron silicate with the chemical formula (Mg,Fe)2SiO4. It is a type of nesosilicate or orthosilicate. The primary component of the Earth's upper mantle,[9] it is a common mineral in Earth's subsurface, but weathers quickly on the surface. Olivine has many uses, such as the gemstone peridot (or chrysolite), as well as industrial applications like metalworking processes.
@@Contrarian-ol2bc I know this is a little off topic, but did you hear about all the wildfires in Greece last year?
@@Contrarian-ol2bc I can't believe the Greeks didn't know you can't use water to put out a Greece fire! 🤣🤣🤣
@@k.sullivan6303 I did not, where they anything like the Maui fires?
Space version of Titan 😮
It would be vastly safer if the failure weren’t so violent. If you get ruptured by too much pressure, it should be repairable. Catastrophic failure really isn’t an option.
At 76 psi a crew would be long dead anyway.
However, I'm pretty sure this test was to see, if the thing is as strong as it's supposed to be,
not to prove it against pressures on-board systems probably wouldn't be able
to produce anyway.
Another reason to not want explosive failure is space debris. Yes these are vast hypotheticals given the pressure needed to burst the habitat, but it’s not a bad design principle for space craft in general - don’t fail violently.
Substituting cameras for windows seems to make windows irrelevant other than for issues related to someone’s egos
Ocean gate vibes going on here
Why have windows at all. Cameras would be enough. And avoids any concerns of weak points caused by windows.
wat if power goes out
@@williamcase426 😂
Then claustrophobia enters the chat. @@williamcase426