Recent comments in /f/space

ShittyBeatlesFCPres t1_jbtriww wrote

Reply to Space sector reacts to collapse of Silicon Valley Bank by TransientSignal

I think it’s very likely SVB gets absorbed by a larger bank and uninsured depositors get made whole. It’s not guaranteed but usually banks go into receivership on a Friday and by Monday a larger bank has snatched them up. SVB’s collapse looks like a traditional bank run and it’s balance sheet is apparently super conservative. You never know. They could find out something awful this weekend. But the problem (at least as I understand it) was basically that it didn’t have a diversified depositor base and because interest rates have rose, couldn’t sell their bond assets quickly, not that they had risky investments and there’s no valuable assets.

The other scenario is that they can’t find an immediate buyer for all their assets/liabilities and the bank is basically wound down over time. The uninsured depositors might even get 100% back in that scenario but it’ll take time and probably won’t be 100%. It seems very likely there will be buyers, though. It wouldn’t have been insolvent as a division of a larger bank.

I guess a third option is shenanigans. We don’t know what the FDIC is learning this weekend. Shenanigans can always be afoot but there’s no indication the bank president used deposits for NFTs or something else dumb and illegal.

2

Decronym t1_jbtkzxi wrote

Reply to Space Force allocates three historic Cape Canaveral launch pads to four companies by Azurebluenomad

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

|Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |ASDS|Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship (landing platform)| |DoD|US Department of Defense| |RTLS|Return to Launch Site| |USAF|United States Air Force|

^(4 acronyms in this thread; )^(the most compressed thread commented on today)^( has 18 acronyms.)
^([Thread #8677 for this sub, first seen 11th Mar 2023, 16:41]) ^[FAQ] ^([Full list]) ^[Contact] ^([Source code])

1

danielravennest t1_jbtisbu wrote

Reply to comment by Uhgfda in Space Force allocates three historic Cape Canaveral launch pads to four companies by Azurebluenomad

No, they will be shared use. A "Launch complex" is pretty large because of the safety buffer zone needed around it. These were originally set up for larger rockets. A near empty Falcon 9 and these smaller rockets going up are smaller hazards, so they can be spaced enough to not damage each other, but still share one launch complex.

Also, SpaceX doesn't use the landing pads very often any more, and when they do the rocket is gone in a few hours. As long as the new rockets aren't trying to launch at the same time (i.e. loaded with fuel), they don't really conflict.

18

Dragonshaggy t1_jbstnu0 wrote

Reply to comment by rider1deep in Space Force allocates three historic Cape Canaveral launch pads to four companies by Azurebluenomad

There already is a U.S. Space Command - USSPACECOM. It’s the combatant command responsible applying war fighting assets from all service components (army, navy, marines, Air Force, and space force) in defense of the space domain. Similar to the combatant command USEUCOM is responsible for European defense by applying war fighting assets from all of the services. Space Command is the combatant arm, space force is the component responsible for organizing, training, and equipping space forces.

10