"... But it worked. We had lots of margin on that main chute."
Love NASA over engineering
this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
45 points (100.0% liked)
Space
8925 readers
76 users here now
Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive.
- No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions.
- Share relevant content.
- Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
- Use appropriate language and tone.
- Report violations.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
Picture of the Day
The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula
Related Communities
🔭 Science
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
🚀 Engineering
🌌 Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
"In the design plans for the system, the word 'main' was used inconsistently between the device that sends the electric signals, and the device that receives the signals," NASA said in a written statement. "On the signal side, 'main' meant the main parachute. In contrast, on the receiver side 'main' was used as a reference to a pyrotechnic that fires to release the parachute canister cover and deploy the drogue.
"Engineers connected the two mains, causing the parachute deployment actions to occur out of order," NASA said.
I used to work as a technical writer and I always got shat on by engineers who worked along the lines of "real men don't write documentation". But those guys won't read this because reading is just too hard for them.
I guess I’m not a real man. I read documentation as a hobby. Started with Legos, and now it’s reading component i2s communication tables…
I'm not saying all engineers are like that. I've met a few capable ones. But the mediocre and less than mediocre ones usually have the biggest chips on their shoulders.
Legos
Fine, I'll be that person: ~~*Lego~~ :)
Edit; I stand corrected: *LEGO
Just let it gos
Technically the word LEGO® is always written in full capitals because it’s a trademark.
The LEGO name is always spelled in all capital letters and the bricks (and/or elements) must always be referred to as “LEGO bricks” (or “LEGO elements”) – never “LEGOs” or “legos”.
And
The first time the Trademarks appear in a headline and in the following text, they should be accompanied by the relevant symbol: the LEGO trademark and SERIOUS PLAY by the ®symbol
Thereafter, the symbols need not to be used more on the same page, or in the same chapter.
Indeed! I stand corrected.
Why wasn't this tested?
Pure Kerbal moment there.
Like when I forget landing legs and the ship is ready to ~~vaporize~~ ~~explode~~ ~~smash into debris~~ lithobrake.
lithobrake
Brilliant word, thanks for using it.
It always fascinated me how, something apparently as simple as a parachute, is so hard to do well. We can operate a fucking drone flying repeatedly on the surface of other planet but we struggle to open a piece of cloth.
Metal and plastic is easy, controlling cloth is hard