1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.SPACE.POLICY

  • Re: Scrubs not RUDs

    From The Running Man@21:1/5 to snidely.too@gmail.com on Tue Mar 4 09:26:22 2025
    On 04/03/2025 03:44 Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:
    SapceX decided things weren't quite right, and after using a bit of
    hold time to thump on things (figuratively speaking), kept Flight 8
    unflown.

    Elon expects a destack.

    This dress rehearsal was going to be the quickest yet launch after
    stacking. The extra since Wednesday^W Friday was spent finishing some
    of the deharmonizing work on the ship's tail end, it seems, following
    the long static fire of S34 and the the update on Flight 7's RUD.


    It's obvious SpaceX can't afford another RUD of Starship. The development
    is costing much more time than they initially expected and NASA is
    continually breathing down their necks to make Artemis 3 a reality.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alain Fournier@21:1/5 to Snidely on Thu Mar 6 19:35:07 2025
    On 2025-03-06 7:16 p.m., Snidely wrote:
    on 3/4/2025, The Running Man supposed :
    On 04/03/2025 03:44 Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:
    SapceX decided things weren't quite right, and after using a bit of
    hold time to thump on things (figuratively speaking), kept Flight 8
    unflown.

    Elon expects a destack.

    This dress rehearsal was going to be the quickest yet launch after
    stacking.  The extra since Wednesday^W Friday was spent finishing
    some of the deharmonizing work on the ship's tail end, it seems,
    following the long static fire of S34 and the the update on Flight
    7's RUD.


    It's obvious SpaceX can't afford another RUD of Starship. The development
    is costing much more time than they initially expected and NASA is
    continually breathing down their necks to make Artemis 3 a reality.

    Well, they caught a booster, but they lost the ship, with some of it
    visible from the Palm Beach area.

    /dps


    Not very different from the previous flight.


    Alain Fournier

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Running Man@21:1/5 to alain245@videotron.ca on Fri Mar 7 15:56:54 2025
    On 07/03/2025 01:35 Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
    On 2025-03-06 7:16 p.m., Snidely wrote:
    on 3/4/2025, The Running Man supposed :
    On 04/03/2025 03:44 Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:
    SapceX decided things weren't quite right, and after using a bit of
    hold time to thump on things (figuratively speaking), kept Flight 8
    unflown.

    Elon expects a destack.

    This dress rehearsal was going to be the quickest yet launch after
    stacking.  The extra since Wednesday^W Friday was spent finishing
    some of the deharmonizing work on the ship's tail end, it seems,
    following the long static fire of S34 and the the update on Flight
    7's RUD.


    It's obvious SpaceX can't afford another RUD of Starship. The development >>> is costing much more time than they initially expected and NASA is
    continually breathing down their necks to make Artemis 3 a reality.

    Well, they caught a booster, but they lost the ship, with some of it
    visible from the Palm Beach area.

    /dps


    Not very different from the previous flight.


    No progress made. Modification didn't work as planned.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)