4 ms·
The entire space reporting has the problem that simultaneously there is an established genre of fanboy fawning about space x, which is kinda unconnected to spac
by yk 5y ago
The entire space reporting has the problem that simultaneously there is an established genre of fanboy fawning about space x, which is kinda unconnected to space x actually starting to disrupt space.
Right now, it looks like one could save a few billions if Artemis is not green lit a decade ago. However, private launches were still rare at that time, so in absence of a, likely expensive, time machine that's just not an option.
So looking at the planned timelines, Artemis I will circle the moon next year, and a crewed landing is planned for 2024, while star ship does not have a planned launch to orbit yet.
Also on a personal note, I am utterly astonished that there will be people on the moon before the subway station down the street is operational.
- Lambdanaut 5y ago> star ship does not have a planned launch to orbit yet Starship has a planned launch to orbit in literally a month pending regulatory approval. * source: https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1451581465645494279 https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/14515814656454942...
- yk 5y agoThey don't plan to circulate the orbit, and instead the plan is to splash down in the Pacific after going 3/4th around the planet. So, I would call that suborbital.
- cryptonector 5y ago* A month, yes, in Elon time. It's almost certainly going to be longer based just on past performance (though that performance is nothing short of astounding). They need at minimum to: - get the chopstick carriage moving and out of the way for launch - get the water deluge system in place - tank up enough water, LOX, and Methane - build more of a blast barrier for the GSE - maybe add a flame diverter - test-fire BN4 on the launch stand, testing all engines or enough that they can be certain of the robustness of the ignition sequence - re-assemble the stack and load it with liquid nitrogen to test structural integrity under load etc.
- panick21_ 5y agoPlease for the love of god, its SpaceX and Starship. > The entire space reporting has the problem that simultaneously there is an established genre of fanboy fawning about space x, which is kinda unconnected to space x actually starting to disrupt space. Yeah totally unconnected. All these people, journalist and engineers are idiots. > Right now, it looks like one could save a few billions if Artemis is not green lit a decade ago Äh: > The Artemis Program began in December 2017 as the reorganization and continuation of successive efforts to revitalize the U.S. space program since 2009. And just btw, just because a program starts, doesn't mean its 'greenlitt'. This is not AT ALL. How NASA is funded. In fact NASA has to fight for budget every year. So literally every year they need budget allocation to continue development of the different element they need. > So looking at the planned timelines, Artemis I will circle the moon next year, and a crewed landing is planned for 2024, while star ship does not have a planned launch to orbit yet. Starship is LITERALLY required to land on the moon. NASA has only 1 way to land humans on the moon and its LITERALLY Starship. And the first orbital test launch is planned for this year. > Also on a personal note, I am utterly astonished that there will be people on the moon before the subway station down the street is operational. The 2024 timeline is not really realistic, 2026 maybe. Subway are a political problem, not a technological one.