Hmm, actually from rewatching it, maybe it was still in its descent phase. It's common to point downwards and power the craft down to the ground, and then level out when you near the ground. Maybe they had unexpected momentum or loss of low speed maneuvering ability...
Yes, more transceivers are better than less, thank you MIT.
But only if they're really tightly synchronized.
MIT got them to be tightly synchronized despite being in different boxes in different rooms, rather than all being in the same box, WITHOUT a lot of extra, extra-special, extra-fancy, extra-cost, hardware. This can be built with a bit more off the shelf stuff (maybe the SAME amount of the same off the shelf stuff but with a bit better firmware) and easily folded into the next generation's chips.
Regardless of how much ground crew (an expense, by the way, that Airlander is designed to minimize) you have, blimps are not supposed to land nose down. This is a Problem(TM) that needs to be investigated and fixed.
Also: You could relay between one device and another out of range with it about as fast as they could talk if they were in range of each other, rather than cutting that rate in half as each talks to a router and the router repeats what it heard.
Sigh, not this "blimps causing a critical helium shortage" meme yet again....
Since they are talking about many devices connecting to multiple routers it's not going to do much for the average home user then. I may have a couple of devices but only the one router.
- If you got a second router, put it some distance away from the first, and hooked them together with a network cable, you could use two devices about as fast as you could one with one router.
- If you had three wired routers you could use three devices close to as fast as you could use one with one router.
And so on.
Note that I'm not talking about using the devices with each near a particular router. I'm talking about the routers spread out around the room or the house and the devices also somewhat spread out - but differently (even just at different spots in the same room) and with no particular relation between the device and the router locations.
A design like Airlander 10 is fundamentally a lot more resistant to the common problems that plague blimps during landing, such as susceptability to winds. It has less inherent lift, a smaller cross section, and more ability to anchor itself down with its fans. However, something clearly did not function correctly here. A blimp should never nose down like that. Either lift or thrust was for some reason configured wrong.
. . . the in-process Maunder-type Solar Minimum gets ignored.
Wow, you should write your local scientist and reveal this important information to them.
Indeed. I saw in some of the pictures from earlier a big gash in the envelope that they were putting a temporary patch on. And the crash ripped open the compartment that contains a lot of electronic equipment.
That would have been an unpleasant day with hydrogen. :
Honestly, I think James Webb just found its first imaging target.
3500 Calories = 1 Food Pound