11 ms·
Why wouldn't they use better than off-the-shelf components for job like this one? That doesn't seem like a money-saving decision.
by wolverine876 3y ago
Why wouldn't they use better than off-the-shelf components for job like this one? That doesn't seem like a money-saving decision.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- dylan604 3y agoWhat if part of the experiment was to test the viability of COTS parts?
- wolverine876 3y agoWas it?
- dylan604 3y agoIt is now
- wolverine876 3y agoIt apparently was the whole time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39075315 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39075315
- dotnet00 3y agoThey used off-the-shelf components because they were low priority, low cost side projects that were not expected to last long anyway. Similarly, the video (and associated audio which malfunctioned) of the skycrane-deployed landing was done by COTS components which otherwise would not have been present at all. Also, by COTS, they're using components which would otherwise be meant for industrial use, so they're still likely to be more rugged than what might come to mind when thinking of off the shelf components.