Artemis 1 is staying on the pad for now, but there seems to be a risk involved.
I will resolve this YES if there are credible reports of more than de minimis damage such that, in hindsight, not rolling back was a mistake.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ23 | |
| 2 | Ṁ20 | |
| 3 | Ṁ12 | |
| 4 | Ṁ8 | |
| 5 | Ṁ7 |
People are also trading
@NicoDelon @LivInTheLookingGlass I would note that I specifically phrased it as "in hindsight", which is to say, ex post, rather than ex ante.
Therefore, if they manage a successful launch tonight, I'm strongly inclined to resolve as NO, though I am open to contrary arguments. And obviously, if the launch fails or otherwise is seriously delayed specifically on account of storm damage, that's a definite YES.
(If it's delayed for unrelated reasons, then I'll need to actually parse through the reports and think it over to decide, which I haven't done yet)
#Artemis press conference update:
Two open issues as a result of the storm:
(1) liquid hydrogen tail service mast umbilical -- suspect electrical connector (even if they can’t fix this, there’s a backup, so won’t preclude launcH)
(2) Room temperature RTV material has delaminated from the eastern side of Orion (basically this is a caulk that has come off, can’t be serviced at the pad, so they need more time to discuss)
Intention is to launch Wednesday though
#NASA #space
Does minor damage count? Apparently it’s not preventing the upcoming launch.
@NicoDelon It’s not clear from the article whether we can still conclude that they didn’t make a mistake ex ante.
