54 ms·

The Russian Luna-25 lander mentionedin the article crash landed a few days ago. They dont appear to be a serious contender at the moment.

retube 3y ago
It's really weird the spin on this. Space X rockets (and others) blow up all the time, it's part of the R&D process. So not sure why this is being reported so negatively (well, actually, I do, of course...)
- Scalene2 3y ago
  Because this was not an R&D mission?
- bkor 3y ago
  > It's really weird the spin on this. The "spin" is coming from you. > Space X rockets (and others) blow up all the time SpaceX has done ~227 successful Falcon missions in a row. Those rockets do NOT "blow up all the time". Further, the success rate of the Falcon 9 is 247/249. Meaning, 99.20%. For the block 5 variant it is 192/192 or 100% success rate. SpaceX is also developing some rockets. You seem to be comparing rockets which are under development and where SpaceX often gives a low probability of success with missions that are supposed to work. The development rockets are NOT in production, they are NOT used to bring cargo in space. It's really apples vs oranges. > So not sure why this is being reported so negatively (well, actually, I do, of course...) Instead of giving some stupid hint just say what you wanted to say. Up to now what you said doesn't make sense to me, so no why not explain the rest as well.
- DetroitThrow 3y ago
  >well, actually, I do, of course... I think it's because Luna-24 nearly 5 decades ago was a success, and reported Soviet success rates of their probe programs were 100% (despite the actual number being lower), alongside some cheekiness due to Russian timeline being chosen to land just before the Indian mission. I don't think that such a failure of a 50 year old technology with a previous "100%" success rate is that weird for people to have such a take about. I think it is weird that you suggest SpaceX rockets are blowing up all the time, when a much more direct and accurate comparison would be the Japanese/Israeli lander failure. Do we consider Japan/Israel serious contenders to NASA/ESA in space here? Probably not in the same way as India and China.
- pavlov 3y ago
  It wasn't a rocket that blew up. The launch was successful. Something failed on the Luna 25 spacecraft itself when it was moving to a pre-landing orbit, and it crashed into the Moon. That kind of thing just doesn't happen to NASA and ESA very much.
cpursley 3y ago
I get it, you dislike Russia - but they are objectively one of the most experienced and consistent contenders in the space race. Around 1,800 space launches (including USSR) vs 1,500 USA. And they seem to be increasing the frequency of launches.
- matthewfelgate 3y ago
  In what way?
  - cpursley 3y ago
    Just look at the negative tone towards all things Russia in their posts. This type of emotionally driven attitude clouds judgement. And sure, there’s plenty to criticize about Russian politics but that doesn’t mean they aren’t a space contender. Heck, replace Russia with India. India has a ton of basic problems but that is not stopping them from competing.
    - matthewfelgate 3y ago
      >"[Russia] are objectively one of the most experienced and consistent contenders in the space race." I mean I'm not sure if this is true.
      - cpursley 3y ago
        How not? Russia has been launching payloads even throughout the war (30 or so in 2023 - including unspecified military systems). They until recently sold around 100 RD-180 rockets to the US - none of which experienced issues. Not to mention putting US astronauts into space. Russia is one of the few nations that actually have the history, engineering talent, finances and the raw resources to compete.
        cuteboy19 3y ago
        It might be true but I doubt a sanctioned nation will be able to continue a largely unproductive enterprise at this scale. They have definitely been punching above their weight so far though, unfortunately it will probably fizzle out soon

retube 3y ago

It's really weird the spin on this. Space X rockets (and others) blow up all the time, it's part of the R&D process. So not sure why this is being reported so negatively (well, actually, I do, of course...)

Scalene2 3y ago
Because this was not an R&D mission?
bkor 3y ago
> It's really weird the spin on this. The "spin" is coming from you. > Space X rockets (and others) blow up all the time SpaceX has done ~227 successful Falcon missions in a row. Those rockets do NOT "blow up all the time". Further, the success rate of the Falcon 9 is 247/249. Meaning, 99.20%. For the block 5 variant it is 192/192 or 100% success rate. SpaceX is also developing some rockets. You seem to be comparing rockets which are under development and where SpaceX often gives a low probability of success with missions that are supposed to work. The development rockets are NOT in production, they are NOT used to bring cargo in space. It's really apples vs oranges. > So not sure why this is being reported so negatively (well, actually, I do, of course...) Instead of giving some stupid hint just say what you wanted to say. Up to now what you said doesn't make sense to me, so no why not explain the rest as well.
DetroitThrow 3y ago
>well, actually, I do, of course... I think it's because Luna-24 nearly 5 decades ago was a success, and reported Soviet success rates of their probe programs were 100% (despite the actual number being lower), alongside some cheekiness due to Russian timeline being chosen to land just before the Indian mission. I don't think that such a failure of a 50 year old technology with a previous "100%" success rate is that weird for people to have such a take about. I think it is weird that you suggest SpaceX rockets are blowing up all the time, when a much more direct and accurate comparison would be the Japanese/Israeli lander failure. Do we consider Japan/Israel serious contenders to NASA/ESA in space here? Probably not in the same way as India and China.
pavlov 3y ago
It wasn't a rocket that blew up. The launch was successful. Something failed on the Luna 25 spacecraft itself when it was moving to a pre-landing orbit, and it crashed into the Moon. That kind of thing just doesn't happen to NASA and ESA very much.

cpursley 3y ago

I get it, you dislike Russia - but they are objectively one of the most experienced and consistent contenders in the space race. Around 1,800 space launches (including USSR) vs 1,500 USA. And they seem to be increasing the frequency of launches.

matthewfelgate 3y ago
In what way?
- cpursley 3y ago
  Just look at the negative tone towards all things Russia in their posts. This type of emotionally driven attitude clouds judgement. And sure, there’s plenty to criticize about Russian politics but that doesn’t mean they aren’t a space contender. Heck, replace Russia with India. India has a ton of basic problems but that is not stopping them from competing.
  - matthewfelgate 3y ago
    >"[Russia] are objectively one of the most experienced and consistent contenders in the space race." I mean I'm not sure if this is true.
    - cpursley 3y ago
      How not? Russia has been launching payloads even throughout the war (30 or so in 2023 - including unspecified military systems). They until recently sold around 100 RD-180 rockets to the US - none of which experienced issues. Not to mention putting US astronauts into space. Russia is one of the few nations that actually have the history, engineering talent, finances and the raw resources to compete.
      - cuteboy19 3y ago
        It might be true but I doubt a sanctioned nation will be able to continue a largely unproductive enterprise at this scale. They have definitely been punching above their weight so far though, unfortunately it will probably fizzle out soon