【Hacker News搬运】SpaceX Super Heavy在海湾溅落，取消筷子着陆

[hackernews]

Title: SpaceX Super Heavy splashes down in the gulf, canceling chopsticks landing

SpaceX Super Heavy在海湾溅落，取消筷子着陆

Text:

hn link

Url: https://twitter.com/spacex/status/1858995009384837380

很抱歉，作为一个AI，我无法直接访问外部链接或社交媒体平台，如Twitter。因此，我无法查看或分析您提供的链接内容。

如果您能提供该Twitter帖子的文本内容，我可以帮助您进行分析和总结，包括如果内容是英文的话，我可以将其翻译成中文。请直接提供文本内容，我会尽力协助您。

Post by: alach11

Comments:

starspangled: They demonstrated the engines re-lighting in space, which is significant. There had been some questions about this because the engine is of a design that is said to be very tricky to start, and the tank pressurization system of the rocket has the risk of water and CO2 ice forming in the methane tanks, which had caused several failures in past tests flights. So this is a pretty good milestone.<p>So we might start seeing test flights actually entering orbit soon. Possibly even carrying some real payloads soon.

starspangled: 他们展示了发动机在太空中重新点火，这具有重要意义。关于这一点存在一些问题，因为发动机的设计据说启动起来非常棘手，火箭的油箱增压系统有在甲烷罐中形成水和二氧化碳冰的风险，这在过去的试飞中造成了几次失败。所以这是一个相当好的里程碑<p> 因此，我们可能很快就会开始看到试飞真正进入轨道。甚至可能很快就会携带一些真正的有效载荷。

ortusdux: I remember there was a phase of Falcon design where it looked like they had perfected barge landing, and then they had a rash of failures. Later on they admitted to intentionally crashing older boosters so they could find the limits of the hardware. They were iterating at such a pace that the data was worth more than a recovered booster. I wonder if that was the case today?

ortusdux: 我记得在猎鹰设计的一个阶段，他们似乎已经完善了驳船着陆，然后他们出现了一连串的失败。后来，他们承认故意撞坏了旧的助推器，以便找到硬件的极限。他们迭代的速度如此之快，以至于数据比回收的助推器更有价值。我想知道今天是不是这样？

simonw: What's the advantage of the chopsticks landing over splashing the thing down in the ocean?<p>Does an ocean landing cause significant damage that's not present with an on-land chopsticks landing?<p>Presumably there are pretty big advantages considering how much it must have cost to develop the chopsticks approach.

simonw: 什么；筷子落地比把东西溅到海里有什么好处<p> 海洋着陆是否会造成重大损害；我们没有看到陆上筷子落地吗<p> 考虑到开发筷子方法的成本，大概有很大的优势。

davidguetta: Is this due to the higher incidence angle ?
Seemed like the main 'difficulty' factor that was upped in the mission description

davidguetta: 这是因为入射角更大吗？看起来像是主要的；困难；任务描述中增加的因素

teractiveodular: See also: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42188247">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42188247</a>

teractiveodular: 另请参阅：<a href=“https:&#x2F；news.ycombinator.com&#x2M；item？id=42188247”>https:&quot&#x2F；news.ecombinator.com；项目？id=42188247</a>