this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2025
23 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

986 readers
1 users here now

Share interesting Technology news and links.

Rules:

  1. No paywalled sites at all.
  2. News articles has to be recent, not older than 2 weeks (14 days).
  3. No external video links, only native(.mp4,...etc) links under 5 mins.
  4. Post only direct links.

To encourage more original sources and keep this space commercial free as much as I could, the following websites are Blacklisted:

More sites will be added to the blacklist as needed.

Encouraged:

Misc:

Relevant Lemmy Communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

That thing looks ridiculous. All these years later and it just looks like a fatter version of the 1970s space shuttle.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

It's perhaps 1/8 the size of the shuttle, and has no facility for passengers. A pic of refueling, with people for scale.

It's looks similar to the shuttle because, well, that's how atmosphere works, and this is the best shape for a reusable re-entry vehicle with the capabilities it has.

Not sure why you'd call it ridiculous. Have you written any papers on optimum vehicle shape for re-entry?

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

I was thinking something like this…

https://www.geekwire.com/2022/radian-aerospace-comes-out-of-stealth-and-raises-27-5m-for-orbital-space-plane-development/

It’s just silly to cancel the shuttle program, then contract with aerospace companies to build… something that is pretty much a copy of the space shuttle.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

i guess it would be except that this is nothing like the shuttle except in some aerodynamic and aesthetic sense

it’s as much like the shuttle as a dreamliner is like a 777

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

As much like the Shuttle as a 707 is like a 777.

Completely different tasks. Spy tech has gotten a lot smaller since the Shuttle launching its Keyhole satellites.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Canceling the money-pit boondoggle the shuttle was a smart move.

https://lemmy.cafe/comment/13003753

[–] Sxan@piefed.zip -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

no facility for passengers.

Boo. We lose someþing fundamental when we stop sending people into space.

[–] jasory@programming.dev 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The Space Shuttle was a complete disaster that only lasted as long as it did because Congress fancied it. It was both more expensive and more dangerous than conventional rockets.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The shuttle was primarily built to get Keyhole spy satellites into space.

The rest was PR and to get Russia to try to build one and waste resources.

These are the satellite chassis that only the shuttle could orbit, because it's cargo bay was specifically designed to hold one.

Most people think the Hubble was this singular major thing, but was just another Keyhole satellite, just used to look outward, instead of toward earth.

[–] aubeynarf@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

kind of like how a dolphin looks like a shark?

can you post a picture of what you think a space plane should look like?

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago

I'm not saying a reusable space vehicle with re-entey capabilities has to look like the space shuttle, but I am saying that if it needs 75% refurbishment between uses it isn't reusable. And at that point, a capsule is a suitable option.