back to article NASA’s new lander CRASHES AND BURNS

NASA’s prototype landing craft of the future, Morpheus, has crashed and burned in its latest launch test. Morpheus is designed to become a general-purpose lander capable of setting down payloads wherever NASA wants them. The Moon, Mars and even asteroids are mentioned in its design brief. The craft has undergone several tests …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. jungle_jim

    !

    Great balls of fire!

    1. Mips
      Childcatcher

      Re: !

      That's what happens to my erection if I have too much beer.

  2. TheRealRoland

    I see this...

    As a very well thought-out PR campaign - to bring everybody back to Earth (geddit? ;-), and showing that the Curiosity landing was pretty extraordinary, and that failure every now and then is acceptable (even though it's expensive).

    Nice, honest, upfront.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I see this...

      Your probably right. After all they did fake the moon landing so why not this.

      1. A J Stiles

        Faking the Moon landings

        All "The Moon Landings were faked!!!1!" conspiracy theories overlook one very important point:

        Producing convincing fakes of the Moon Landings, and keeping everything under wraps for so long, would have been more effort than actually getting to the Moon.

        1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

          Re: Faking the Moon landings

          Of course, everyone knows that the conspirators went to the Moon to plant convincing evidence in order to throw the public off the scent. It's the US military-industrial complex after all. With the money they had at stake, they did not spare any expense to make sure that noone will ever discover their plot. I heard they even sent as many as 12 people down to the Moon surface so that they could then convince everyone that the landings have happened... oh, wait a second...

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I see this...

        They're pretty good then. Because if you point a telescope at the landing sites THEY COME AND FAKE THE IMAGE RIGHT THERE IN YOUR TELESCOPE in order to show you the shit that got left up there.

        1. Naughtyhorse
          Joke

          Re: I see this...

          yeah!, man thats why they putt all that lsd in the water supply!!

          you can never be too careful when yuor dealing with 'the man' ya know!

      3. Bill Neal
        Joke

        Re: I see this...

        Unfortunately, you cannot be told what 'a hardware component failure' is. You have to see it for yourself.

    2. ItsNotMe
      Pint

      Re: I see this...

      Or just maybe NASA are trying to make the Russians feel just a little bit better, after some of their recent cockups.

      You know...compost happens folks.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I see this...

      only as far as actualy having some point.otherwise just a waste.

  3. Robert Heffernan
    Flame

    Armadillo?

    To me, that looks like a lander based on Armadillo Aerospace's Pixel lander design.

    I know they were doing some NASA work based on that design and the Armadillo site has been quiet since feb so i can imagine this is what they been upto. Plus the crane teathered tests are definately Armadillos style.

    1. Hoagiebot

      Re: Armadillo?

      FYI: The text introduction at the beginning of the NASA video clearly states that this lander was partially manufactured and assembled by Armadillo Aerospace.

      1. Robert Heffernan
        WTF?

        Re: Armadillo?

        FYI, try viewing the article on an Android device. There is no video at all. If i had seen it i wouldn't have posted the comment.

        1. Frank Rysanek
          Thumb Up

          Re: Armadillo?

          It was an interesting and insightful comment nonetheless - thanks for that.

    2. Levente Szileszky
      FAIL

      Re: Armadillo?

      Yeah, that explains a lot - maybe it was running on a Doom 3-derived, outdated-at-launch Carmack-style engine...

      ...it would certainly explain such an awful launch. ;)

  4. MondoMan
    Meh

    Given that it's been 15 years since DC-X, it's sad that the NASA-aerospace complex has been able to stifle the development of decent launch technology.

    http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/DCX/

  5. Thorne

    To quote The Tick "Gravity is a harsh mistress"

    1. ElNumbre
      Joke

      To quote Zapp Brannigan

      "You win again, gravity!"

      Also,

      "She's built like a steakhouse but she handles like a bistro"

      Zapp Brannigan, the velour fog.

      1. Bob Merkin
        Coffee/keyboard

        Re: To quote Zapp Brannigan

        The best part was when my brain read that back to me in Zapp's voice.

  6. Hoagiebot

    I will have to remember this the next time one of my little hobby electronics projects go awry-- even things designed and controlled by the brilliant minds at NASA fail sometimes.

    In any case, while I found this video fairly amusing, I sincerely hope that the U.S. Congressmen don't get the wrong idea from it. As NASA stated, it is far better for problems to crop up during the prototype phase here on Earth when it is still early in the program instead of having these problems crop up in the atmosphere of Mars years later after billions of dollars has been spent. Even so, I could see a U.S. Congressmen seeing this video and interpreting it as yet more "wasted" tax payer money literally going up in smoke, and then slashing NASA's budget even further to the bone. NASA's one of the shining examples of the good that the United States can do, so I would hate to see anything that would cause NASA to get crippled even further than it already has been by the U.S. government.

    1. Charles 9

      All NASA would need to do in reply is to show some videos of weapons testing (funded by the DoD) going awry as well, then ask the Congressman why the favoritism. Why does no one look at all the money lost in Defense testing, hmm? Point of the matter is, pricey as it was, test models going kablooey like this are par for the course, seeing as they're testing complex systems that, for the most part, haven't been seen in action before. In the great dark unknown, scientists and engineers have come to expect the occasional Murphy moment.

      1. Nigel 11

        Trident Missile test fail

        Much more expensive, much more spectacular.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z-3fjg4dYY

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        granted.so what are they all aiming at,in the long run.

        is there not one project here on earth that they could not aim at and improve things a bit down here.

        yes,its all very tech and geeky but the point is what,the first step towards,a usable ftl drive or a usable time machine,what are they actualy aiming for

        1. Ian Yates

          They're aiming for understanding more of our solar system and what was/is in it with the goal of expanding our tiny biological accident of a species on to other planet(s) before it's too late.

    2. JimC

      Or even...

      If we only test things that are guaranteed to work perfectly, what's the point of doing the testing...

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      you mean the electronics that would have happened anyway,wether nasa had existed or not.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Joke

    It was the countdown...

    ... 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 0

    No wonder it went bad.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: It was the countdown...

      Yeah really. WTF was that? Do "Merkins" not know how to count backwards? Is that the standard NASA countdown? Very strange.

      1. BristolBachelor Gold badge
        Joke

        Re: It was the countdown...

        It may have been a rounding error; after doing the conversion from feet to cm?

    2. Mr. Great Sage
      Joke

      Re: It was the countdown...

      "Ok then on three. Everyone ready? One.... Two..... Five!"

      "three sir..."

      "Three! Chaaaaaaaarge!"

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: It was the countdown...

        They got distracted by Tweeting, Facebook and even Google+ the launch.

  8. Steve Knox
    Mushroom

    Lunar Lander

    Thanks for the link to the past. Now I'm sure to get even less done...

    Pic is related (to my playing skill, at least.)

    1. Not That Andrew

      Re: Lunar Lander

      You should try Kerbal Space Program. You can biuld all sorts of unusual rockets and space planes and kill dozens hundreds of Kerbals before making orbit, and learn a lot about orbital mechanics and rocket engineering at the same time.

      1. ElectricFox
        Alien

        Re: Lunar Lander

        While we're talking about such games, you should give Lunar Flight a go. It's the spiritual successor to Lunar Lander brought into 3d land with nice graphics and avionics.

        http://www.shovsoft.com/lunarflight/

        I bought it for a couple of quid in a steam sale and it's great fun.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Lunar Lander

        > You should try Kerbal Space Program.

        NASA would benefit from a MechJeb here I feel.

  9. A Non e-mouse Silver badge

    My commiserations to the people working on this. That teethered flight looked really good. It's a pity it couldn't obtain a stable take-off.

  10. Arachnoid
    Thumb Up

    Hmmm..reminds me of a Space 1999 hopper design,maybe they consulted Gerry Anderson over the design specs.

    1. heyrick Silver badge
      Happy

      Ah, Gerry Anderson. That explains the unfeasibly large fireball.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Pint

    deja-vu

    I remember playing that (albeit in 23x80) on an Altair 8080 in 1976-77.

    Now I really feel old. And I landed successfully on my second try.

    I think that game is what got me into I.T., if not into space...

  12. Pete 47

    And that ladies and gentlemen...

    ..is how the first interplanetary war will start.

  13. David 45

    Blue screen

    Run by Windows?

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    doh

    you are joking,briliant minds at nasa,if they had brains,they left nasa years ago,to get a job at a private firm that will still be there in10-15 years,nasa is on its knees and dieing,its a minor thing called money,nasa still pisses cash away as if it grows on trees,they not learned much since the 60's and what do they do for yank public,not a lot realy,even stupid yank public is starting to realise it.

    exactly what galaxy shaking data do they expect from curiosity etc,oh look,a manky dead worn out planet,just like we knew a century ago,brilant.

    you know why they all reacted so over the top at control when curiosity did'nt smash itself to pieces,its simple,they all have nice lazy well paid jobs pissing about for the next ten years at the tax payers cost.

    would you employ an ex nasa person in your business,what they going to do for you,think up ways waste money/time/resources or something productive? nasa has always been a joke and will slide into history as a complete waster of supposed talent and cash.

    next "bright idea" resurected from 1965,lets build super saturn launcher,we have only sat on idea for 50 years,perhaps most of folk who remember it first time round who sadi no then are dead,maybe we can slip it past congress etc this time.expect some realy spectacular youtube clips when an early one goes of bang on pad

    1. Deadmonty
      WTF?

      Re: doh

      Could employ them to teach you the basics of English and punctuation.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Thumb Down

        Re: doh

        why.most of you appear to have understood and got the sentiment i intended,if so anal that every single post must use "correct" english you must be busier whiner than even i am.

        go get a life.post was submited to try and get some folk to try thinking for themselves,not to pass an english exam,this is possibly one of many reasons this country so deep in the shite.

    2. Tank boy

      Re: doh

      You're an idiot. NASA spent roughly 2 million dollars US in R and D and actually building it. They claim that it's about a 500k machine, which for a truck (or lorry if you prefer) to deliver supplies TO THE MOON, isn't really going to break the bank.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        moron

        er,you probably mean billions.

        i think you will find it costs more than 2·5 million to fuel first stage on launcher.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      oh really,how very interesting,thats good to know

      I'm afraid that I can't take on board for consideration any opinion written by someone who abuses commas like that.

      Did you swap all your capitalisation for them, thinking that you'd got yourself a bargain?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Angel

        Re: oh really,how very interesting,thats good to know

        another one.

        yes,correct punctuation spelling can be important.sometimes.

        please see above answers to others.

    4. Colin Brett
      Thumb Down

      Re: doh

      Nice try. Not enough RandDOm capITALs but pretty good, I think. A flame of the week candidate, perhaps?

      Colin

    5. Trollslayer

      Re: doh

      From your spelling and grammar it is clear the drugs have worn off.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Thumb Up

        Re: doh

        dead right mate,just about to take another dose of pills for me buggered knee/spine etc.

    6. Ian Yates
      Boffin

      Re: doh

      "oh look,a manky dead worn out planet,just like we knew a century ago,brilant"

      Even ignoring the rest of your ignorant tripe, have you really not understood that NASA have actually found liquid water on Mars?

      Seriously, look in to the research and engineering they fund some time, and check out their motto.

    7. Fatman
      WTF?

      Re: doh

      Please do us all a big favor......

      Find a fire hydrant, and sit on it.

      Then open up the valve and let the water flow.

      Hopefully, you may be cured of your obvious case of shit for brains syndrome.

  15. 2Fat2Bald

    Oooopsie

    Models and prototypes blowing up is almost what they're *for*. The fact is that you don't design a perfect machine right from the drawing board. So you test it at every stage, sometimes on the bench, sometimes with models and you find the mistakes/challenges/questions in the design.Sometimes something won't work, sometimes it will suggest methods of improvement, sometimes it will go bang, Certainly it's better than un unmanned model blows up now than a manned mission to Mars in front of the world's press in ten years time.

    I would say to any congressman planning use this development stage as an excuse to slash NASA funding to ask themselves how they'd feel if they got on an airliner and a rep from boeing said "We've never flown this design before, but we're pretty sure it'll work okay. Here is your parachute and asbestos underwear, just in case".

    1. Neil Barnes Silver badge
      Mushroom

      Re: Oooopsie

      If it hasn't gone bang, it is insufficiently tested.

      This is a truism in all engineering; you don't want to know if it works, you want to know how and under what conditions it breaks. If those conditions are too close to those under which it will be operating, you do something about it.

      1. Lord Voldemortgage

        I met a bloke once who tested tractors to destruction for a living.

        I'm still jealous that I didn't set myself down a career path.

        And I am particularly jealous that I didn't set myself down a career path that led to something like that.

        1. Nigel 11

          Anyone remember the TV series "21st century jet" which followed the Boeing 777 from design to first flight? the bit I remember most was the destructive testing of its wings. (Clamp plane to the floor, put hydraulic jacks under wing-tips, watch the strain guages, jack up until the wings break.. Best explosives-free explosion I can recall, and very reassuiring that they're about 10% stronger than the designers calculated).

          Checking that it really could stop on brakes only during a worst-case aborted take-off was also fun (perhaps less so for the pilot). The brake disks were literally white hot when it stopped, but nothing caught fire.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            see,useful testing for a useful real world problem.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Test something to destruction...

          .... I heard the Merlin engines (the Spitfires and P-51 fame) were tested this way. We all know how they turned out.

          The only way to know where the limit is, is to break it, and fail when the limit is reached. If it didn't fail, the limit was not reached.

          Up to this day, Airplane turbines can deliver 103% on takeoff. It means that keeping them at this power rate indefinitely will DESTROY them, and you better risk destroying them than making a 747-shaped crater on the ground.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Oooopsie

      and what is this much vaunted manned visit meant to achieve long term then.

      are you thinking of going as a tourist?

      1. heyrick Silver badge

        Re: Oooopsie

        "and what is this much vaunted manned visit meant to achieve long term then."

        Perhaps to expand humanity onto another world so there's a home for us once we've totally shagged up this place.

        You know, it's the Perseids shower tonight and the next few nights. Go stand outside and make a wish or two as a shooting star passes by. But take time to observe the immeasurable size of "space", the universe, that light fuzz that is our galaxy, a moderate size one in amongst many. To say space is HUGE would be quite the understatement. And us? Everything we know, have done, and will do in the immediate future has taken place on this lump of rock we call Earth. All the wars, all the love, all the everything. Has happened here. We, as a species, are not so intelligent as we'd like to think. We've been to our own satellite, and we've sent cameras to a few of our neighbouring planets, and we've just about made it to the depths of our own oceans but so much of that is unknown. So much of other nearby celestial bodies is unknown. And meanwhile we're reproducing like bacteria and burning our way through the resources we have because, you know, all this end-of-oil-and-climate-change-bullshit will surely be somebody else's problem, right?

        There will be a day we might want to go to inhabit another planet. And hopefully long after I'm dead, there may even be a day when we don't have a choice anymore. Kinda can't go far without the groundwork being done. I, myself, cannot build a cathedral; we as a species cannot inhabit another planet. Not yet.

        "are you thinking of going as a tourist?"

        I'm something of a loner, can spend long periods of time by myself. So, yeah, if I'm asked, I'd be up for it. Not so much as a tourist (can't mail back a postcard from Mars), but certainly as an explorer. Hell yeah!

        1. Neil Barnes Silver badge
          Thumb Up

          Re: Oooopsie

          It seems, Heyrick, that friend Tleaf100 is a groundhugger. He would have us and our descendants marooned here on this little rock, vulnerable to any passing dinosaur killer, when we could occupy an entire solar system.

          To be sure, the risks to the individual will be higher, but the risks to the species - and call me bigoted, but I'm rather fond of hom. sap. - are reduced.

          Or perhaps he's just concerned about the money spent. Maybe he thinks NASA stuff bundles of fifty dollar notes in any convenient cubby of the launch vehicle and dispose of them off-planet, instead of spending each and every one of them here on Earth?

  16. Ian 69
    Mushroom

    After 8 pints and a vindaloo

    ... I have similar problems.

    1. perlcat
      Mushroom

      Re: After 8 pints and a vindaloo

      It's Popeye's Fried (Zero-Calorie) chicken over here, but same principle applies.

      1. heyrick Silver badge
        WTF?

        Re: After 8 pints and a vindaloo

        Zero calorie fried chicken? Scary concept - is it even real food? How can you have a chicken, fried no less, with no calories?

        [subthought: WTF is the point of eating a zero-calorie anything? seems like a waste of money/time/effort]

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: After 8 pints and a vindaloo

          "CHOW™ contained spun, plaited, and woven protein molecules, capped and coded, carefully designed to be ignored by even the most ravenous digestive tract enzymes; no-cal sweeteners; mineral oils replacing vegetable oils; fibrous materials, colorings, and flavorings. The end result was a foodstuff almost indistinguishable from any other except for two things. Firstly, the price, which was slightly higher, and secondly, the nutritional content, which was roughly equivalent to that of a Sony Walkman."

          "MEALS™ was CHOW™ with added sugar and fat. The theory was that if you ate enough MEALS™ you would a) get very fat, and b) die of malnutrition."

          - The Inventions of Famine, quoted from Good Omens by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman

        2. perlcat
          Facepalm

          Re: After 8 pints and a vindaloo

          Zero calories as in it doesn't stay in your gut long enough to add to your caloric intake for the day. A form of Ex-Lax, but with a new and improved sonic boom.

  17. Gimpi

    Splat?

    Well so much for emergency engine cutoff when orientation exceeds a certain angle. One would think that would be at the core of the thing?

    1. Nigel 11
      Boffin

      Re: Splat?

      Why bother? Don't forget the cost penalty of every extra gram that you send to another planet. If it tips past the point of no recovery on a mission, it's doomed anyway, engine on or engine off.

      And don't say that they could have put a shutoff valve in for terrestrial testing and later removed it for space missions. It's possible that it might be working only because of the presence of an open valve instead of an unadorned pipe.

      When Intel clones a working fab, they clone *everything*. No matter how much of a bodge it looks (and in the first place probably was), that comical tangle of plumbing may be an essential part of the reason it's working. It's far too expensive to do an experiment to find out that it wasn't ... or was.

  18. chosenbygrace
    Alien

    http://eternian.wordpress.com

    Dur, we no know what Roswell is, we no not now how mak antigavity, we're dumb and clueless. We need spend billions of tax payer dollars on dumb failures cuz, dur, dur, never heard of a crfasshed UFVO. Yeah. Sickening murderers and thieves in government. You're sick.

    1. Tom 38
      Mushroom

      Re: http://eternian.wordpress.com

      Seriously, read this blog. Wow. An excerpt:

      51) Can you show, even by the scientific method, what difference it would make if everyone believed evolution?

      Whacked out crazy christian fella needs to understand what "the scientific method" means. It's really easy (this is why you should have been taught it when you were 10) and consists of only a few steps.

      It starts with a question. The scientist takes that question, and provides a possible outcome - we call this a "hypothesis", it's greek for "to suppose". Now we have a hypothesis, we can make a prediction about what this means. Having predicted something, we now derive a test. The test is formulated so that performing the test will tell us if our hypothesis is correct.

      Finally, having derived and tested a hypothesis, we compare the results to our prediction and analyse them.

      This entire process is the scientific method. It starts with a question, and a hypothesis that can be tested, testing that hypothesis and analysing the results of the test.

      So, now, back to your blog: "what difference it would make if everyone believed evolution". My hypothesis is that the world would be a much more civil place. In order to test this, using the scientific method as you request, I now need you and all your 'christian' friends to start accepting the theory of evolution. Once this is done, I'll start analysing the results and get back to you.

      1. Fatman

        Re: Whacked out crazy christian fella ....

        Please excuse him, because he has brain damage.

        I suspect he got it from excessive Bible Thumping.

    2. Loyal Commenter Silver badge
      Trollface

      Re: http://eternian.wordpress.com

      Can I have some of your antigavity? Theres a whole bunch of split gavity round here that needs cleaning up, and that stuff can stain.

      1. Vic

        Re: http://eternian.wordpress.com

        > Theres a whole bunch of split gavity round here that needs cleaning up

        Gravity, like so many other things, is soluble in ethanol.

        This is why you can stand at strange angles after a skinful - the local gravity map is so distorted by the dissolved gravity in yuor bloodstream.

        It's also why you tend to fall flat on your face - there's more gravity running around your system...

        Vic.

  19. MachDiamond Silver badge

    Armadillo

    Armadillo built the rocket. Yes, it's a clone of pixel. I believe that the nav system is by NASA and the controller electronics might be Armadillo standard stuff. It runs on liquid methane and liquid oxygen.

    Nice explosion, that. Fortunately, Armadillo has become very good at building replacement rockets. <eg>

  20. Matt Hamilton
    WTF?

    An extra second?

    Seems NASA get an extra second more than the rest of us. Watch the timeline in the video player. It goes 5:58... 5:59... 5:60.... 6:00.... 6:01

    Them boffins are clever!

    -Matt

    1. Mayhem

      Re: An extra second?

      They must have over compensated for missing '1' in the countdown

  21. Stoneshop
    Pint

    Liquid methane/liquid oxygen engine

    For landing on Titan that would mean you'd only have to bring the oxygen. Smart.

  22. lawndart

    With a name like that...

    Mars Orbit Rocket Plane Hardware Evokes Uncontrollable Spin.

    What were they expecting?

  23. the future is back!
    Mushroom

    awe

    worth every penny - that was pretty cool!

  24. mhenriday
    Boffin

    Say what one will, no one can accuse Morpheus

    of sleeping on the job ! Looked more like a nightmare to me....

    Henri

  25. JeffyPooh
    Pint

    Did Armstrong punch out?

    See above.

    82-y.o. Neil just had heart surgery. Best wishes sir.

  26. Trollslayer

    Those who accuse NASA if lies and incompetence

    Are holding up a mirror.

  27. thegrouch

    Speaking of Armstrong

    This footage reminds me of the test of the LLRV when he had to hit the eject button just seconds before it crashed. He must have had nerves of steel to pilot the real thing down to the Moon.

    1. Alex Brett

      Re: Speaking of Armstrong

      While I'm not denying the Apollo astronauts were very brave to take on such a lot of risk etc, it is worth mentioning that the LLTV was always going to be much more unstable than the real lunar lander, as it was operating in an environment with 6 times the force of gravity than the LEM was going to operate in, so having to bail out of it was unlikely to add any significan worry over the real thing...

  28. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Re: The Moon, Mars and even asteroids are mentioned in its design brief.

    Did NASA hire someone from DARPA and forget to tell them to scale back the mission scope because NASA doesn't have that kind of money?

  29. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    wasters

    what is this,the nasa fan club ?

    or are we not allowed to criticise use of vast amounts of cash,possible talent and resources.

    somebody tell me what is so mind boggling important that nasa does,and please dont spin the yarn that they innovate new ideas,kit,matieials etc,we could achieve all that trying to set world wide fart sniffing system for health monitoring.itwould be more use than going to dead planets etc.

    you better hope it is dead though,cos the result of someone returning genetic bits back to earth is just plain scary.

    oh fine,it may only turn our still quite nice home into lifeless rock,so thats ok,cos its nasa doing it and we must'nt ask iffy questions.

    i had hoped better of el-reg,but no,same closed,cloned folk "thinking".

    1. Nigel 11

      Re: wasters

      Luckily back when we lived in caves, there were people who didn't think that playing with fire was a complete waste of time, likely to get people burned or worse. Because otherwise, we'd still be living in caves.

      For a more recent example of curiosity and its delayed value, consider the field effect transistor which today lies at the heart of virtually all micro-electronics. The underlying physics was studied in the 1930s, and the transistor predicted as a theoretical possibility decades before the technology existed to make one (let alone two billion of them on a single chip).

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: wasters

        i did'nt say dont explore,i did'nt say dont wonder,i most def did not say dont think.

        i still say that as a way of furthering mans knowledge about all sorts of things,nasa is a very bad way of doing it.

        the day we give up being curious about universe we live in is the first day of the death of humanity.

        if we had infinite resources,brains enough,and no other large problems that could kill us tomorrow or next week,then nasa being,slow,messy,wasteful etc,would'nt be important,but we do have finite resources/brains etc so it does become important that we use it all wisely.

        if nasa can do their hobby solely on private cash,from honestly run business, then fine.

        if not,expect a lot more questions from folk with clout in the real world.

        1. Charles 9

          Re: wasters

          "if not,expect a lot more questions from folk with clout in the real world."

          Thing is, the same can be said of Defense spending. Consider that.

          1. Fatman

            Re: Thing is, the same can be said of Defense spending.

            I suggest, that Defense spending is more problematic that any funding for NASA.

            Unlike NASA funding, Defense spending is premised upon Who can we kill today!

            As opined above. my interpretation of tleaf's comments imply 'brain damage'.

        2. Neil Barnes Silver badge

          Re: wasters

          NASA is almost certainly not the best way to achieve space access for exploration - but at present, it's about the only way we've got.

          But then, what do I know? I live in a country which is the only one I know have to have abandoned a working space programme, to its shame.

  30. perlcat
    Facepalm

    They must be slipping.

    I can't figure out why they were testing something that they claim can explode in the course of testing right next to a truck full of hydrogen tanks.

    Methinks that if you'd asked them *before* they lit the fuse, they'd have said it was "perfectly safe. We don't blow shit up anymore."

    I'm just happy that wacky hijinks didn't ensue with hydrogen for added kaboom.

    1. keith_w
      FAIL

      Re: They must be slipping.

      I was checking all the posts to see if anyone else had noticed the trailer. However, I thought they were LOX or methane tanks since that's what the engine runs on. Gotta wonder if there was a range safety officer there.

  31. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Hey kids

    Listen I heard there was this fantastic new fangled device called a CONTROL MOMENT GYRO. It can generate a force in free space and prevent exactly this kind of muck up from happening. Yet every time I get into a design review and suggest it, I get pounced on by everybody in the room "Are you nuts? It weighs too much! If you don't know how to make stability happen by properly controlling gimbal thrusters you shouldn't be flying!" they said.

    Well I agreed on the last point at least.

  32. Blitheringeejit
    Pint

    Do my eyes deceive me or ...

    ... did it come down within fire-spitting distance of a stack of white static pressurised tanks? Presumably containing something relevant to the exercise, such as hydrogen, oxygen etc..?

    If it were me I'd be leaving a little more margin for error.

    Pint icon because they'll need one after that.

    1. Charles 9

      Re: Do my eyes deceive me or ...

      Your eyes MAY have been deceiving you. For all we know, the tanks could've been empty--and thus inert. Anyone know conclusively one way or the other?

  33. Local Group
    Mushroom

    Big Deal

    So we're in the phony failure phase of the era of peace after the end of the cold war. That's when one side pretends it's program is being run by the three stooges and can't even get a ham and cheese sandwich into orbit; then the other side, obviously playing cretin catch up ball, tests a 'device' that falls down and "crashes and burns" when it's training wheels are removed. Give me a break.

    Meanwhile, both sides are working 24 hours a day welding thousands of armed nuclear devices into the false backs of shipping containers and inside double hulled ships, but I don't think we'll ever get a count of those.

  34. Mike 125

    How hard can it be..?

    Hmmm, I really think that after 50 years, it's time they had this hovering thing licked. I mean, come on, it's hardly rocket science.

  35. Graham Marsden
    Alert

    Morpheus, has crashed and burned...

    ... I blame Agent Smith myself...!

  36. Mark Allread
    Unhappy

    Pretty poor from NASA there

    I mean come on, this stuff isn't exactly rocket science.

  37. WildPaul
    FAIL

    Deja Vu

    That fail almost exactly repeats my attempted launch in the late 1960's of a homemade 1/20 scale balsa wood model of the Lunar Excursion Module - including the resulting fire that had my small launch crew frantically stomping out the burning grass of the launch field.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like