SpaceX fires off Starship SN11's Raptor engines ahead of rocket's first high altitude flight TODAY - Daily Mail | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Tech

SpaceX fires off Starship SN11's Raptor engines ahead of rocket's first high altitude flight TODAY – Daily Mail

Published

 on


SpaceX fires off Starship SN11’s Raptor engines for a static test ahead of rocket’s first high altitude flight TODAY – but will this one survive the landing?

  • SpaceX’s latest prototype has completed a successful static fire test
  • Starship SN11’s Raptor engine ignited early Friday morning for a few seconds
  • The firm wanted to ensure a new engine met all the launch criteria
  • With the successful static fire test, SpaceX is now reading SN11 for its first flight
  • The rocket will soar six miles into the sky and collected data during the flight
  • However, all three previous prototypes have exploded following the flight 

SpaceX is gearing up to launch its fourth Starship prototype, following a successful Raptor static fire test that send a burst of flames from the base of Serial Number 11 (SN11), signaling it is ready to soar.

The pre-check test ensured a new engine that replaced a failed unit is ‘healthy’ for the voyage – the original engine was swapped for a new unit Wednesday.

The county judge of Boca Chica, Texas, where SpaceX’s testing facility is located, approved road closures around the beach and Highway 4 for March 26 from 8:30 ET until 8:30pm ET for the potential first high-altitude flight of SN11.

‘If members of the public would like to view the flight, please so at a safe distance and away from Boca China Beach,’ County Judge Eddie Treviño wrote in a road closure release.

SpaceX’s agenda is to send SN11 six miles into the air, hover over the earth and then turn on its side for the infamous ‘belly flop’ before re-orientating for landing.

This will be the Elon Musk-owned firm’s fourth Starship to take the journey, but those who tune into a livestream may wonder if it will suffer the same fate of its predecessors – the three previous rockets ended the mission in a ball of flames.

SpaceX is gearing up to launch its fourth Starship prototype, following a successful Raptor static fire test that send a burst of flames from the base of Serial Number 11 (SN11), signaling it is ready to soar.

The Raptor engine test kicked off early morning Friday with a goal of ensure the new unit was up and running.

Around 1am ET on March 24, SpaceX quietly rolled in Raptor SN64 to the launch pad to replace another that had failed previous testing.

Although the firm has not announced what caused the engine to fail, it is suggest that a several-day launch delay following a successful first static fire test Monday.

However, the latest static fire test appeared to be go as plan and now SN11 is patiently waiting on the launch pad for its first trip off the ground.

The county judge of Boca Chica, Texas, where SpaceX’s testing facility is located, approved road closures around the beach and Highway 4 for March 26 from 8:30 ET until 8:30pm ET for the potential first high-altitude flight of SN11

The Raptor engine test kicked off early morning Friday with a goal of ensure the new unit was up and running. Around 1am ET on March 24, SpaceX quietly rolled in Raptor SN64 to the launch pad to replace another that had failed previous testing

The Starship is constructed of stainless steel, which stands 160 feet tall, and is fitted with a nose cone and flaps at the side.

Each rocket that has launch was tasked with collecting data throughout the flight to better improve the next.

However, all three that previously flew have exploded following the descent back to Earth.

The Starship is constructed of stainless steel, which stands 160 feet tall, and is fitted with a nose cone and flaps at the side

SN8 took to the skies on December 10 – marking the first high altitude attempt of a Starship prototype.

The rocket hit all the marks including shutting down its Raptor engines, reaching an altitude of 7.8 miles and performing the belly flop.

The only thing it was unable to perfect was the landing, but Musk said previously that the rocket was unlikely to land safely.

The moment the rocket touched down, it ignited in flames and left nothing behind but its nose cone.

Then came the next prototype, SN9, which SpaceX had high hopes of landing when it attempted its high altitude test flight in February.

SN8 took to the skies on December 10 – marking the first high altitude attempt of a Starship prototype. The only thing it was unable to perfect was the landing, but Musk said previously that the rocket was unlikely to land safely – it exploded upon impact

Then came the next prototype, SN9, which SpaceX had high hopes of landing when it attempted its high altitude test flight in February – but this prototype exploded as well

This time the rocket was unable to maneuver into the vertical position before landing on the launch pad, hindering its ability to stick the landing

This time the rocket was unable to maneuver into the vertical position before landing on the launch pad, hindering its ability to stick the landing.

It landed with a deafening crash, and exploded into bright orange flames and a dust cloud, but the fire did not spread.

However, it was SN10 that shocked the world.

The massive rocket exploded roughly 10 minutes after landing on the launch pad following its first high, with some suspecting a methane leak was to blame.

The failure occurred after SpaceX declared it a success, as SN10 flew, flipped and landed without crashing and burning like the previous prototypes SN8 and SN9 – CEO Elon Musk praised the rocket in a tweet for ‘landing in one piece.’

‘Third time’s a charm, as the saying goes,’ SpaceX principal integration engineer John Insprucker said during SpaceX’s livestream on March 3.

‘We’ve had a successful soft touchdown on the landing pad that’s capping a beautiful test flight of Starship 10.’

Some sources speculate the landing legs attached to the base did not deploy, which sent the rocket toppling over, and crushed pipes holding methane.

The force of the explosion was enough to send the body of the large rocket – which was slightly tilted to one side after landing – into the air, which caused it to flip and land on the ground on its side.

However, it was SN10 that shocked the world. The massive rocket exploded roughly 10 minutes after landing on the launch pad following its first high, with some suspecting a methane leak was to blame

An object that could be a methane tank was seen lying on the Boca Chica landing area after the fire and smoke from the massive explosion had cleared.

However, SN10 was able to complete its mission of gathering data on controlling the rocket during re-entry and many called the launch a success rather than another Starship failure.

In the past year alone SpaceX has completed two low-altitude flight tests with SN5 and SN6 and over 16,000 seconds of run time during ground engine starts.

Musk recently an ambitious plan to get humans on Mars by 2023 – 10 years before NASA aims to land astronauts on the Red Planet.

And Starship rockets are key players in turning that dream into a reality.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Slack researcher discusses the fear, loathing and excitement surrounding AI in the workplace

Published

 on

 

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Artificial intelligence‘s recent rise to the forefront of business has left most office workers wondering how often they should use the technology and whether a computer will eventually replace them.

Those were among the highlights of a recent study conducted by the workplace communications platform Slack. After conducting in-depth interviews with 5,000 desktop workers, Slack concluded there are five types of AI personalities in the workplace: “The Maximalist” who regularly uses AI on their jobs; “The Underground” who covertly uses AI; “The Rebel,” who abhors AI; “The Superfan” who is excited about AI but still hasn’t used it; and “The Observer” who is taking a wait-and-see approach.

Only 50% of the respondents fell under the Maximalist or Underground categories, posing a challenge for businesses that want their workers to embrace AI technology. The Associated Press recently discussed the excitement and tension surrounding AI at work with Christina Janzer, Slack’s senior vice president of research and analytics.

Q: What do you make about the wide range of perceptions about AI at work?

A: It shows people are experiencing AI in very different ways, so they have very different emotions about it. Understanding those emotions will help understand what is going to drive usage of AI. If people are feeling guilty or nervous about it, they are not going to use it. So we have to understand where people are, then point them toward learning to value this new technology.

Q: The Maximalist and The Underground both seem to be early adopters of AI at work, but what is different about their attitudes?

A: Maximalists are all in on AI. They are getting value out of it, they are excited about it, and they are actively sharing that they are using it, which is a really big driver for usage among others.

The Underground is the one that is really interesting to me because they are using it, but they are hiding it. There are different reasons for that. They are worried they are going to be seen as incompetent. They are worried that AI is going to be seen as cheating. And so with them, we have an opportunity to provide clear guidelines to help them know that AI usage is celebrated and encouraged. But right now they don’t have guidelines from their companies and they don’t feel particularly encouraged to use it.

Overall, there is more excitement about AI than not, so I think that’s great We just need to figure out how to harness that.

Q: What about the 19% of workers who fell under the Rebel description in Slack’s study?

A: Rebels tend to be women, which is really interesting. Three out of five rebels are women, which I obviously don’t like to see. Also, rebels tend to be older. At a high level, men are adopting the technology at higher rates than women.

Q: Why do you think more women than men are resisting AI?

A: Women are more likely to see AI as a threat, more likely to worry that AI is going to take over their jobs. To me, that points to women not feeling as trusted in the workplace as men do. If you feel trusted by your manager, you are more likely to experiment with AI. Women are reluctant to adopt a technology that might be seen as a replacement for them whereas men may have more confidence that isn’t going to happen because they feel more trusted.

Q: What are some of the things employers should be doing if they want their workers to embrace AI on the job?

A: We are seeing three out of five desk workers don’t even have clear guidelines with AI, because their companies just aren’t telling them anything, so that’s a huge opportunity.

Another opportunity to encourage AI usage in the open. If we can create a culture where it’s celebrated, where people can see the way people are using it, then they can know that it’s accepted and celebrated. Then they can be inspired.

The third thing is we have to create a culture of experimentation where people feel comfortable trying it out, testing it, getting comfortable with it because a lot of people just don’t know where to start. The reality is you can start small, you don’t have to completely change your job. Having AI write an email or summarize content is a great place to start so you can start to understand what this technology can do.

Q: Do you think the fears about people losing their jobs because of AI are warranted?

A: People with AI are going to replace people without AI.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Biden administration to provide $325 million for new Michigan semiconductor factory

Published

 on

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Biden administration said Tuesday that it would provide up to $325 million to Hemlock Semiconductor for a new factory, a move that could help give Democrats a political edge in the swing state of Michigan ahead of election day.

The funding would support 180 manufacturing jobs in Saginaw County, where Republicans and Democrats were neck-in-neck for the past two presidential elections. There would also be construction jobs tied to the factory that would produce hyper-pure polysilicon, a building block for electronics and solar panels, among other technologies.

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said on a call with reporters that the funding came from the CHIPS and Science Act, which President Joe Biden signed into law in 2022. It’s part of a broader industrial strategy that the campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee, supports, while Republican nominee Donald Trump, the former president, sees tariff hikes and income tax cuts as better to support manufacturing.

“What we’ve been able to do with the CHIPS Act is not just build a few new factories, but fundamentally revitalize the semiconductor ecosystem in our country with American workers,” Raimondo said. “All of this is because of the vision of the Biden-Harris administration.”

A senior administration official said the timing of the announcement reflected the negotiating process for reaching terms on the grant, rather than any political considerations. The official insisted on anonymity to discuss the process.

After site work, Hemlock Semiconductor plans to begin construction in 2026 and then start production in 2028, the official said.

Running in 2016, Trump narrowly won Saginaw County and Michigan as a whole. But in 2020 against Biden, both Saginaw County and Michigan flipped to the Democrats.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

The Internet is Littered in ‘Educated Guesses’ Without the ‘Education’

Published

 on

Although no one likes a know-it-all, they dominate the Internet.

The Internet began as a vast repository of information. It quickly became a breeding ground for self-proclaimed experts seeking what most people desire: recognition and money.

Today, anyone with an Internet connection and some typing skills can position themselves, regardless of their education or experience, as a subject matter expert (SME). From relationship advice, career coaching, and health and nutrition tips to citizen journalists practicing pseudo-journalism, the Internet is awash with individuals—Internet talking heads—sharing their “insights,” which are, in large part, essentially educated guesses without the education or experience.

The Internet has become a 24/7/365 sitcom where armchair experts think they’re the star.

Not long ago, years, sometimes decades, of dedicated work and acquiring education in one’s field was once required to be recognized as an expert. The knowledge and opinions of doctors, scientists, historians, et al. were respected due to their education and experience. Today, a social media account and a knack for hyperbole are all it takes to present oneself as an “expert” to achieve Internet fame that can be monetized.

On the Internet, nearly every piece of content is self-serving in some way.

The line between actual expertise and self-professed knowledge has become blurry as an out-of-focus selfie. Inadvertently, social media platforms have created an informal degree program where likes and shares are equivalent to degrees. After reading selective articles, they’ve found via and watching some TikTok videos, a person can post a video claiming they’re an herbal medicine expert. Their new “knowledge,” which their followers will absorb, claims that Panda dung tea—one of the most expensive teas in the world and isn’t what its name implies—cures everything from hypertension to existential crisis. Meanwhile, registered dietitians are shaking their heads, wondering how to compete against all the misinformation their clients are exposed to.

More disturbing are individuals obsessed with evangelizing their beliefs or conspiracy theories. These people write in-depth blog posts, such as Elvis Is Alive and the Moon Landings Were Staged, with links to obscure YouTube videos, websites, social media accounts, and blogs. Regardless of your beliefs, someone or a group on the Internet shares them, thus confirming your beliefs.

Misinformation is the Internet’s currency used to get likes, shares, and engagement; thus, it often spreads like a cosmic joke. Consider the prevalence of clickbait headlines:

  • You Won’t Believe What Taylor Swift Says About Climate Change!
  • This Bedtime Drink Melts Belly Fat While You Sleep!
  • In One Week, I Turned $10 Into $1 Million!

Titles that make outrageous claims are how the content creator gets reads and views, which generates revenue via affiliate marketing, product placement, and pay-per-click (PPC) ads. Clickbait headlines are how you end up watching a TikTok video by a purported nutrition expert adamantly asserting you can lose belly fat while you sleep by drinking, for 14 consecutive days, a concoction of raw eggs, cinnamon, and apple cider vinegar 15 minutes before going to bed.

Our constant search for answers that’ll explain our convoluted world and our desire for shortcuts to success is how Internet talking heads achieve influencer status. Because we tend to seek low-hanging fruits, we listen to those with little experience or knowledge of the topics they discuss yet are astute enough to know what most people want to hear.

There’s a trend, more disturbing than spreading misinformation, that needs to be called out: individuals who’ve never achieved significant wealth or traded stocks giving how-to-make-easy-money advice, the appeal of which is undeniable. Several people I know have lost substantial money by following the “advice” of Internet talking heads.

Anyone on social media claiming to have a foolproof money-making strategy is lying. They wouldn’t be peddling their money-making strategy if they could make easy money.

Successful people tend to be secretive.

Social media companies design their respective algorithms to serve their advertisers—their source of revenue—interest; hence, content from Internet talking heads appears most prominent in your feeds. When a video of a self-professed expert goes viral, likely because it pressed an emotional button, the more people see it, the more engagement it receives, such as likes, shares and comments, creating a cycle akin to a tornado.

Imagine scrolling through your TikTok feed and stumbling upon a “scientist” who claims they can predict the weather using only aluminum foil, copper wire, sea salt and baking soda. You chuckle, but you notice his video got over 7,000 likes, has been shared over 600 times and received over 400 comments. You think to yourself, “Maybe this guy is onto something.” What started as a quest to achieve Internet fame evolved into an Internet-wide belief that weather forecasting can be as easy as DIY crafts.

Since anyone can call themselves “an expert,” you must cultivate critical thinking skills to distinguish genuine expertise from self-professed experts’ self-promoting nonsense. While the absurdity of the Internet can be entertaining, misinformation has serious consequences. The next time you read a headline that sounds too good to be true, it’s probably an Internet talking head making an educated guess; without the education seeking Internet fame, they can monetize.

______________________________________________________________

 

Nick Kossovan, a self-described connoisseur of human psychology, writes about what’s

on his mind from Toronto. You can follow Nick on Twitter and Instagram @NKossovan.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version