Interesting. Thanks for the info! I love learning about this stuff.

In case you know - was there some sort of exclusivity agreement the USA had for their Russian rocketry purchases? What would have prevented Russia from sharing their info with whoever they wanted, while still selling to the USA? Or was this agreement guided by political norms? Was the Clinton program named? I’d like to learn more about it.

My understanding is that, in retaliation to US sanctions imposed at the start of the invasion of Ukraine, Russia stopped providing RD-180 rocket engines that were used in the Atlas V. My surprise is that the USA relied on Russian rocket engines to put national security payloads into space.

They will have suits. There is a spare on the ISS, and Dragon will bring another one up. They covered that in the press conference.

They are certainly there with no means to return until February, which they will do on a different company’s capsule, from a mission that was supposed to last 8 days and instead will last 8 months. That sounds like stuck to me.

Whose fault is it, if not Boeing’s?

The helium leaks on the RCS thrusters were a known problem before the Crew Flight Test, and Boeing gave assurances to NASA that the leaks wouldn’t be problematic. What were those assurances based on? I don’t know much about spaceflight, but it seems crazy to me that CFT was allowed to launch when there was a known issue that could impact docking and undocking with the ISS, and possibly deprive the capsule of a backup means of orienting for deorbit.

A person has to wonder - did Boeing’s desire for a commercial success, at any point, impact their assessments of Starliner’s safety? Is it possible that running this project at a set price was an impediment to proper, timely, and safe development?

At the press conference, NASA confirmed that there is a spare suit on the ISS that fits, and Dragon will bring up another one. Assessment was that this still presented risk, but less risk than the astronauts taking the Starliner back to earth.

Not sure of any beginner FAQs on scanning.

I guess it all depends on how much scanning you plan to do, the size of things you want to scan, and how accurate you need the scans to be. Out of curiosity, what are you looking to scan? Is it something that can’t be modeled in CAD software?

At the risk of giving you yet another option - Teaching Tech did a video on a neat scanning rig called the OpenScan Mini. Looks like someone linked OpenScan below as well. You build it yourself from electronic components, a pi, a pi camera, and some printed parts. Results look pretty decent for what it would cost to build, and probably worth the time and effort if you plan to do lots of scanning.

Thanks! I was sure there was a nomenclature, I just forgot what it was. Cheers for the reminder.

The Russians, the Iranians, the proud boys and uncle Jack in the family WhatsApp are all part of the same hydra of crap.

I see what you mean, but I disagree. Bot accounts are categorically different in this space. It’s impossible to have a meaningful conversation with a bot. So when I see things like bot activity disguised to look like organic human activity, especially when it aligns with hostile foreign state interests, that’s something that I think is uniquely bad and worth pointing out and combating.

Communities like https://lemmy.world/c/independentmormonism, https://lemmy.world/c/independentcatholicism, https://lemmy.world/c/thirdpartynews, all created today, and modded by a 9 day old user account with 640 comments and 334 posts.