• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    124
    ·
    7 months ago

    Headline: “the astronaut landing on the moon won’t be an American”

    Article: “some non-Americans will be accompanying Americans on an American mission to the moon”

    Those claims are not the same.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      7 months ago

      The first non-American will step foot on the moon. How is that not what the headline says?

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        56
        ·
        7 months ago

        The headline implies that only non-Americans will be landing on the moon.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                7 months ago

                I’m pretty sure what something implies is dependent upon the reader’s interpretation. And it looks like many readers think it implies that a non-American is about to land on the moon even if you didn’t think so.

                • ABCDE@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  The writers intention. You can read there being an implication, but it doesn’t mean it is implied.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  If I say “my brother is traveling to France,” that doesn’t mean “at some point in the future, my brother will travel to France.”

                  At least I’ve never heard anyone use “is” followed by an action that way.

            • ABCDE@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              7 months ago

              It doesn’t, it refers to one but can be of many. A person is attending a football match for the first time today. It doesn’t mean no one else is.

              • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                No. The sentence you posted implies a football match was never before attended by any person.

                If you want to say one of many, you should say Some person/someone.

                Or you can qualify the person. E.g. A non-american astronaut will be landing on the moon for the first time.

                • ABCDE@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Nope, because you know football matches have been attended by people. Ignoring basic facts doesn’t make your understand correct, it’s silly.

      • fluxion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        ·
        7 months ago

        Imagine Kennedy gave an amazing speech about “landing an American on the moon” and then sent him up aboard a Russian rocket. I’m guessing most people wouldn’t have been like “Well, technically that’s accurate. Well done Mr. President.”

        • jeffw@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          7 months ago

          This isn’t about the rocket, it’s about the national origin and the space agency that sent the person

          • KazuyaDarklight@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            27
            ·
            7 months ago

            Ok, but the space agency in charge is…still NASA. These aren’t American astronauts doing a ride-along on a Japanese mission, it’s literally the opposite.

              • KazuyaDarklight@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                7 months ago

                The article mentions the agency and OP brought agencies into the conversation in the message I replied to. I wouldn’t have hit on it otherwise.

  • PrincessLeiasCat@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Michael Collins covers the White House. Follow him on X, formerly Twitter, @mcollinsNEWS.

    Can we just talk about the fact that the guy who wrote this article has the same name as the Apollo 11 Command Module pilot?

  • Edwardthefma99✡@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    The USA is in the lead we allredy have the tools and know how to make the trip and back and its being improved upon by elon musk and space x who is allredy setting up the trip getting things ready for frequent trips carrying cargo and such

        • intrepid@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          I’m a bit skeptical though. Forget the fact that the crew will still be carried by the Orion (equivalent to Apollo’s CM) and only the landing part is provided by Starship. Two small unmanned lunar landers already toppled on their sides because they couldn’t get a proper footing on the uneven and loose lunar regolith. The Apollo LM had a very low C.G. Starship on the other hand, is a full long rocket stage with enough thrust to dig a hole at the landing site. How confident are we of a proper vertical landing? A topple would be a death sentence for its crew.

          Another big problem is their choice of propellant. Boil off is a well known issue with cryo propellants like LOX and liquid methane. So far, no rocket has used cryo propellants for any stage that doesn’t use it soon after filling. The longest wait after filling is done for stages that coast for a few hours. SpaceX plans to have a fuel depot in space that’s filled by multiple (12?) other starships. Even if we assume that SpaceX eventually gains the ability to rapidly reuse Starships, there is going to be practical limitations on how fast the orbital fuel depot can dock with refuellers. Considering that the refuellers themselves need part of the propellant to reach space, and that the fuel depot is going to have boil offs, how many actual flights and time will it take to refuel the depot to full? And remember that after all that, they need 2-3 days to reach the moon before executing the orbit insertion, deorbit and landing burns. Further, the lander will need to spend some time on moon (which depends on their mission and presence of a moon base). What about the boil off during all that time?

          What about the engine relight? They were supposed to demonstrate engine relight during the last mission. But they abandoned it because the propellants were nearly fully consumed and they were tumbling out of control (which is weird because I couldn’t see anything like an RCS that could arrest the rotation). Let’s assume they would eventually demonstrate a raptor relight in space. That still doesn’t solve the full problem. Cryo engines need to be chilled and purged prior to any relights. For in-space relights, part of that is usually done on the ground. But that won’t help if you need to relight after several hours or even days. Where do you get the propellants for all that?

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 months ago

      SpaceX leadership has entire positions dedicated to keeping Musk away from their projects so that he doesn’t screw up all of their actual work lmao

    • nomad@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      To be fair: spacex is doing amazing things and Elon is just the face of things.

        • otp@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m guessing the 99 in your username isn’t an indication that you were born in 1999, lol

        • Bo7a@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Learn to fucking spell before you start denigrating other people’s intelligence.

          Yes, I am being condescending. And in case that is too big of a word for you - It means I am talking down to you.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Ah yes! It’s Pepe Julizio Del Bardon y Paz. I know, long name but the guy can tell you if anyone has ever pooped the water you are about to drink or the dust in any room. If they can get him fresh lunar dust he can tell us if indeed no one has ever lived on the moon and for how long. This is what I like to call the best Sarcastic Journalism of the night. (It’s night here). Anyway, for just a reply and 5 easy payments of 1$, I can keep bringing you up to date with all the bullshit floating in my brain. Operators are standing by…sorry I meant Surgeons, it’s the translation. Sometimes words translate but stripped of their meaning.