/sci/ - Science & Math

In case it wasn't clear, they unironically used the mission elapsed time to determine whether it was in orbit or not.
As long as the clock had run to T+ more than a few minutes, it was determined to already be in orbit. So it used the thrusters in fine adjustment mode when it should have been boosting. That's the dancing thrusters you see in the webm. Also note the people walking around at high speed, so that video is sped up, with over 4 minutes of Silly Walks from the thrusters.

>>15731295
I would not be surprised. Certainly they were working closely with FAA and knew what the items were before the announcement.
Besides, Boing would definitely get that kind of treatment.

>>15248178
>and have to buy McDonnell Douglas
Oh yeah, THAT worked out so well for Boing!
>>15248154
...except for the part where Amazon already has a bunch of launches lined up for it anyhow. It would look just as good for Bozo as it would make the delays for New Glenn look bad.
And it would also let them remove the ULA engine delivery priority for BE-4.

>>14499259
cost plus

>>11699857
Wasn't CST-100 expected to be to be the more likely of the two? Proven technology, etc. Old space BTFO.
And then SpaceX had a ground boom that set them back a year or so. Boing had a chance after that, then they forgot to set up a parachute properly in the abort test (but muh redundancy) and botched the clock on the unncrewed launch, exposing other fuck-ups, one of which could have damaged the capsule on re-entry if they hadn't noticed because of the original fuck-up.

>>11539880
kek