spsheridan
spsheridan OP t1_j7wbfdx wrote
Reply to SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
Successful full-duration static fire. Elon indicates they "turned off 1 engine just before start & 1 stopped itself, so 31 engines fired overall. But still enough engines to reach orbit!" https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1623793909959901184?s=20
spsheridan OP t1_j7r4qzs wrote
Reply to comment by blingybangbang in SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
Elon's latest public statement is sometime next month. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1621998434289942529
spsheridan OP t1_j7qs1wt wrote
Reply to SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
NSF indicates they will stream the static fire tomorrow on their YouTube channel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kG4AbAcia0
spsheridan OP t1_je1i8ca wrote
Reply to comment by Andromeda321 in Fast radio burst linked with gravitational waves for the first time by spsheridan
This paper was submitted to and published by Nature Astronomy. Presumably, it was peer-reviewed before being published. If the probability of the FRB being associated with the gravitational wave is not much better than random chance, what does that say about the peer review process at Nature Astronomy? Is it broken?