Timeline for How Intuitive Machines' engines "crank out unmatched performance in the space domain" allowing "transit of Van Allen belts once, unlike competitors"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 23, 2021 at 1:07 | vote | accept | uhoh | ||
| Aug 17, 2021 at 9:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSpaceExp/status/1427555832980557828 | ||
| Aug 16, 2021 at 17:06 | answer | added | Abdullah is not an Amalekite | timeline score: 2 | |
| Aug 16, 2021 at 0:36 | comment | added | Organic Marble | One of my former co-workers works there. He's not able to be very forthcoming about what they do. | |
| Aug 15, 2021 at 22:09 | comment | added | David Hammen | Startups also expect people to be able "to work outside normal schedule and adjust schedule to meet peak periods and surge requirements when required." (This is straight from several of IM's job requirements.) My personal record was a 21.5 hour workday, followed by a 12 hour work day, followed by a nearly normal 9 hour workday, followed by a weekend where I mostly slept. Others outdid me. | |
| Aug 15, 2021 at 21:59 | comment | added | David Hammen | From looking at their website, (1) it looks like IM has hired some awesome website developers, and (2) it looks like IM has gone all-in on their CLPS contract, plus a few related items. Gone, for example, are any links to the non-aerospace projects I worked on. Also gone are any links to this cool drone project (which I did not work on). Cutting projects that don't look massively profitable is what startups do. | |
| Aug 15, 2021 at 21:05 | comment | added | David Hammen | @leftaroundabout There are some very knowledgeable and very smart people who work at Intuitive Machines. Several of the people who worked on NASA's Morpheus Project (which not coincidentally used LOX/methane engines) moved to Intuitive Machines. I know this as a fact because I worked for IM for a while. They went through a rough patch five years ago or so. The rough patch ended when they were named a CLPS contractor a bit less than three years ago. I wish them all success. | |
| Aug 15, 2021 at 14:36 | comment | added | leftaroundabout | @RussellBorogove and before that, they probably needed to spend weeks in education to get the necessary background knowledge... | |
| Aug 15, 2021 at 13:34 | comment | added | Russell Borogove | “hundreds of hours of testing and design” 😂😂🤣 | |
| Aug 15, 2021 at 13:24 | comment | added | Dragongeek | This sounds like a fat load of "marketing speak" to me... | |
| Aug 15, 2021 at 7:40 | comment | added | David Hammen | Wikipedia has an article on this subject. | |
| Aug 15, 2021 at 2:09 | comment | added | Tom Spilker | They might be setting up a "strawman" argument: if someone is proposing electric or some other low-thrust main propulsion system, then achieving a lunar transfer orbit would require multiple revs and thus multiple passes through the Van Allen belts. But if there is another proposal for a high-thrust system that can do it with a single burn, then the strawman argument is disingenuous. | |
| Aug 15, 2021 at 2:05 | comment | added | Tom Spilker | @OrganicMarble Yep! Mass enters also: an engine that produces one tick higher in Isp than another but is 20 times the mass doesn't excite propulsion engineers. I can't find any specs on the web but my search was admittedly brief. | |
| Aug 15, 2021 at 1:40 | comment | added | Organic Marble | I suppose that unless there is another engine that produces exactly the same Isp, their performance is unmatched. | |
| Aug 15, 2021 at 0:44 | history | asked | uhoh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |