Perhaps the 84 second burn overflowed the integer (2^6) and was caught by a 2^7s check (127s)
You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments 12 points
*
The tweet you link didn’t indicate that. It said that an engine failure likely caused the overrun, running for 127 seconds instead of the planned 84. Why would something have a 2^7 int size check?
Edit: Quoted
The head of Roscosmos Yuri Borisov said that the main cause of the #Luna25 crash was an engine failure. Instead of the planned 84 seconds, he worked 127 seconds.
Am I missing something?
2 points
5 points
Ah I think it’s Twitter’s new thing where you can’t see replies of your not logged in.
3 points
Nitter link. This shows replies.
