Reading the paper behind this video and they actually expected the nozzle to fail, the carbon-carbon nozzle extension had a preexisting crack. But it wasn't expected to cause any issues upstream.
The chamber failure was the 'surprise', and it failed at a layer where the 3D print was paused and restarted.
They have photos of the failures from another camera angle along with the exact timings:
This was part of a build with 4 other chambers, another one managed 51 starts before a crack formed in the same place.
Notice that there's a visible line where the print paused on the one that didn't fail, and that lines up with the location where the chamber separated.
This weekend the first 100 octane unleaded aviation gas was sold in the US - after years of development, testing and rulemaking GAMI's G100UL is now available at Reid Hillview airport in San Jose. aopa.org/news-and-media…
Many piston engine planes still need 100 octane fuel and while lead was eliminated from car gas it hadn't been possible to do that for aircraft, partly because modifying aircraft is a massive problem so the EPA let small aircraft continue to use 100LL (low lead)
But in the 40+ years since the FAA has mismanaged multiple attempts to develop a replacement. Programs like PAFI - Piston Aviation Fuels Initiative and EAGLE - Eliminating Aviation Gas Lead Emissions felt like the rules were set to favor the status quo.
I am in no way an expert on submersibles, but, based on what I know and what I see here, the pressure hull failed at the glue join between the carbon fiber and the titanium ring on the front of the sub, that failure propagated backwards with the water pushing everything into the rear of the cabin in milliseconds.
The front just popped off, the bolts used to hold it in probably snapped due to the water rushing in, the window shot out, no idea where that is.
Also I don't see where the forward ring is, it got propelled away and being less draggy travelled further.
This wasn't a window failure, it wasn't titanium failure, and judging by the transcript they weren't seeing or hearing anything wrong, just dropping a couple of weights to slow the descent.
I suspect that there was a mismatch in the modulus of compression between the end caps and carbon fiber, and that would put extra force on that join. This was what the US Navy Labs papers discussed when they tested to failure with steel end caps.
BTW: I know there's a lot of comments mocking the use of Home depot hardware on the Titan, but appreciate for a moment that the ROV taking these photos has a milk crate visible in the bottom left.
Using old data, and cloud computing scientists working at the Asteroid Institute identified 27,500 new asteroids. These were objects that had been imaged in the past but hadn't had orbits calculated from those images. And a big part of this is because there's new algorithms that can exploit massive increases in computer power available today.
If you take a photo of empty sky there's going to be asteroids in there, if you do a long enough exposure you might even see a trail showing the object moving against the stars, but just because you capture a photo of an asteroid doesn't mean you're discovered it.
You need to figure out the orbit so its motion can be calculated going forwards in time. This is the position and velocity of an object in space, 6 parameters, which means you need at minimum 3 different images showing the position on the sky. This was first described by Newton.
The NTSB has the initial report on the jet that crashed on a highway in Florida. Oil pressure warnings on both engines.
The throttles were set to the idle position, but that's the kind of thing you'd do when you're committed to a forced landing. data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/a…
One fuel sample showed a small amount of water.
The right wing hit a road sign and that's likely what spilled a lot of fuel leading to the fire.
There are lots of comments about the Nova-C lander being too tall, contributing to the tip over on landing.
Let's consider why it's this shape:
Firstly the landing legs are as wide as they can get for the Falcon 9 fairing without requiring a deployment mechanism.
Secondly, the core of the vehicle is the propulsion, and two propellent tanks. These are mounted inline because it makes for the lightest design, the propellent tanks are different sizes and masses so putting them side by side makes balancing more complex.
A common way to avoid the asymmetric mass problems is to use pairs of tanks, here's the Morpheus lander as an example.
But, this in turn means adds a lot of mass between more material needed for the tanks, extra plumbing, valves and structure.
Inline tanks save mass.