7 ms·

Yeah who is going to deliver faster and more reliable than SpaceX? Boeing? LM? Doubt

by raverbashing 1y ago

ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago
Not sure if you're being sarcastic. Have they managed to get starship to orbit yet?
- delichon 1y ago
  > Not sure if you're being sarcastic. Have they managed to get to orbit anything bigger than a banana? Yes, about 4,000 metric tons. My IP packets are traveling through part of it now.
  - ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago
    On starship?
    - delichon 1y ago
      You said "they". They are SpaceX. Their expertise is transferable to Starship.
      - ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago
        Clearly not, because they've launched about 10 Starships and have failed to achieve orbit.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
        allenrb 1y ago
        If they had achieved orbit on any Starship flight test, it would have been a serious violation of their launch license & test criteria. Hint: they’ve never tried to orbit Starship. Yes, they had expected to do more, sooner. So say that. What you’ve written here is nonsense. Starship is trying to do more than anyone ever has. If all (ALL!) they’d wanted to do was build a giant rocket with a reusable booster and an expendable second stage, they’d already be done.
        ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago
        > If all (ALL!) they’d wanted to do was build a giant rocket with a reusable booster and an expendable second stage, they’d already be done. Maybe. But instead, in addition to building a giant rocket with a reusable booster and an expendable second stage, they also on want it to reach orbit, that's why it's not done yet. And likely will never be, because starship is severely underpowered.
        allenrb 1y ago
        I’m not even sure what to say to this. They’re barely short of orbit in terms of energy. Even if you believe that’s all they’ve got or will ever have, merely removing the recovery hardware and robustness from Ship gets them to orbit with payload. Otoh, maybe best to just believe what you want to. That’s sort of what we do these days, isn’t it?
        ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago
        > merely removing the recovery hardware and robustness from Ship I mean if you have to remove important parts to get to orbit, you can't say that you could get to orbit. You couldn't, you just admited that you'd have to remove such and such. What am I missing?
  - Cthulhu_ 1y ago
    As far as I know they only deployed some Starlink dummies so far.
- Culonavirus 1y ago
  Several times (if we keep disingenuous "wheeeel akchually" technical gotchas out of this). The fact that they keep safety in mind is a good thing. Any starship that got to space could have easily reached orbit, but it didn't because spacex cares more about NOT uncontrollably deorbiting a giant hunk of steel than impressing a "redditor" who doesn't understand how orbital mechanics work.
  - ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago
    You're suggesting that they could and don't, I'm suggesting that they can't. Apparently NASA is starting to have the same suspicions.
    - peterfirefly 1y ago
      We know they can.
  - m4rtink 1y ago
    For comparison other organizations don't have an issue with leaving 20 ton rocket stages in orbit, leading to uncontrolled reenetry. :) https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/a32451633/china-long-march-5b-rocket-debris/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/a32451633/china-long-... That's 20 tons of mostly aluminium - 100+ ton stainless steel Starship would be potentially much more dangerous, so it is good SpaceX cares. :)
JohnFen 1y ago
I don't know who else can, but I do seriously doubt SpaceX is going to be able to deliver within the next decade or so either.
- dotnet00 1y ago
  They're by far the ones with the most relevant experience and actually flying hardware (human spaceflight, propulsive landing, flight testing hardware for HLS), in the US. I don't think it's going to take them a decade, but they probably won't be ready within Trump's term, and I think that's the real reason for this latest push.
  - chasd00 1y ago
    when the Democrats wrestle back control of the federal government all things related to Trump, no matter how tangentially, are getting castrated. That includes SpaceX because of Elon Musk so they need to get it while the getting's good. edit: the vindictive behavior of the current crop of politicians is just cutting off your nose to spite your face. All of it is going to come right back around when the parties swap places.
    - dotnet00 1y ago
      I don't expect democrats to be super vindictive to SpaceX, except if they think they can redirect that money to old-space companies like Boeing (which is less about being vindictive and more that most politicians are shamelessly corrupt).
- peterfirefly 1y ago
  They have a pretty good chance, actually. They are almost done with the hard parts of the Starship.
  - virgilp 1y ago
    I wouldn't say "almost done" - orbital refueling is likely one of the hard parts, and it wasn't attempted yet.

Yeah who is going to deliver faster and more reliable than SpaceX? Boeing? LM? Doubt

ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago

Not sure if you're being sarcastic. Have they managed to get starship to orbit yet?

delichon 1y ago
> Not sure if you're being sarcastic. Have they managed to get to orbit anything bigger than a banana? Yes, about 4,000 metric tons. My IP packets are traveling through part of it now.
- ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago
  On starship?
  - delichon 1y ago
    You said "they". They are SpaceX. Their expertise is transferable to Starship.
    - ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago
      Clearly not, because they've launched about 10 Starships and have failed to achieve orbit.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - allenrb 1y ago
        If they had achieved orbit on any Starship flight test, it would have been a serious violation of their launch license & test criteria. Hint: they’ve never tried to orbit Starship. Yes, they had expected to do more, sooner. So say that. What you’ve written here is nonsense. Starship is trying to do more than anyone ever has. If all (ALL!) they’d wanted to do was build a giant rocket with a reusable booster and an expendable second stage, they’d already be done.
        ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago
        > If all (ALL!) they’d wanted to do was build a giant rocket with a reusable booster and an expendable second stage, they’d already be done. Maybe. But instead, in addition to building a giant rocket with a reusable booster and an expendable second stage, they also on want it to reach orbit, that's why it's not done yet. And likely will never be, because starship is severely underpowered.
        allenrb 1y ago
        I’m not even sure what to say to this. They’re barely short of orbit in terms of energy. Even if you believe that’s all they’ve got or will ever have, merely removing the recovery hardware and robustness from Ship gets them to orbit with payload. Otoh, maybe best to just believe what you want to. That’s sort of what we do these days, isn’t it?
        ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago
        > merely removing the recovery hardware and robustness from Ship I mean if you have to remove important parts to get to orbit, you can't say that you could get to orbit. You couldn't, you just admited that you'd have to remove such and such. What am I missing?
- Cthulhu_ 1y ago
  As far as I know they only deployed some Starlink dummies so far.
Culonavirus 1y ago
Several times (if we keep disingenuous "wheeeel akchually" technical gotchas out of this). The fact that they keep safety in mind is a good thing. Any starship that got to space could have easily reached orbit, but it didn't because spacex cares more about NOT uncontrollably deorbiting a giant hunk of steel than impressing a "redditor" who doesn't understand how orbital mechanics work.
- ekjhgkejhgk 1y ago
  You're suggesting that they could and don't, I'm suggesting that they can't. Apparently NASA is starting to have the same suspicions.
  - peterfirefly 1y ago
    We know they can.
- m4rtink 1y ago
  For comparison other organizations don't have an issue with leaving 20 ton rocket stages in orbit, leading to uncontrolled reenetry. :) https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/a32451633/china-long-march-5b-rocket-debris/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/a32451633/china-long-... That's 20 tons of mostly aluminium - 100+ ton stainless steel Starship would be potentially much more dangerous, so it is good SpaceX cares. :)

JohnFen 1y ago

I don't know who else can, but I do seriously doubt SpaceX is going to be able to deliver within the next decade or so either.

dotnet00 1y ago
They're by far the ones with the most relevant experience and actually flying hardware (human spaceflight, propulsive landing, flight testing hardware for HLS), in the US. I don't think it's going to take them a decade, but they probably won't be ready within Trump's term, and I think that's the real reason for this latest push.
- chasd00 1y ago
  when the Democrats wrestle back control of the federal government all things related to Trump, no matter how tangentially, are getting castrated. That includes SpaceX because of Elon Musk so they need to get it while the getting's good. edit: the vindictive behavior of the current crop of politicians is just cutting off your nose to spite your face. All of it is going to come right back around when the parties swap places.
  - dotnet00 1y ago
    I don't expect democrats to be super vindictive to SpaceX, except if they think they can redirect that money to old-space companies like Boeing (which is less about being vindictive and more that most politicians are shamelessly corrupt).
peterfirefly 1y ago
They have a pretty good chance, actually. They are almost done with the hard parts of the Starship.
- virgilp 1y ago
  I wouldn't say "almost done" - orbital refueling is likely one of the hard parts, and it wasn't attempted yet.