4 ms·

</sarcasm>? If not, why do you think Starship is vaporware?

by okay_yes 11mo ago

justapassenger 11mo ago
There are prototype that are called Starship. There's nothing even remotely reassembling what was advertised to the public (and sold to the government) as Starship. It's Duke Nukem Forever.
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > nothing even remotely reassembling what was advertised to the public (and sold to the government) as Starship If it can get its mass into orbit, it delivers what it sold. I'd currently put my money on a successful orbital launch of Starship before New Glenn re-flies a booster for a paying customer.
  - justapassenger 11mo ago
    US government didn't pay for getting its mass into orbit. Getting Starship to the orbit means that they have something called Starship in the orbit. It doesn't mean product that they sold isn't vaporware - what was sold with a name of Starship included much more things than getting stage 2 into orbit.
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      > what was sold with a name of Starship included much more things than getting stage 2 into orbit ...what was it? Are you talking about HLS? Propellant transfer? (The latter is absolutely "getting its mass into orbit.") Which of those has been either officially cancelled or had its delays materially impact the customer's timeline?
      - justapassenger 11mo ago
        None of them were cancelled. But none of them exist in any form or shape remotely reassembling the product - therefore - vaporware. It's that simple. But also, since you're telling me there had been no material impacts to the customers timelines, sorry, I don't think you're arguing in good faith, so I'm not going to engage here anymore.
        llbbdd 11mo ago
        In this thread your pedantic definition of vaporware seems to hinge on a compatibility between spec and delivery that has not existed once in the history of frontier engineering, so I'm not sure good faith is in high supply here in any case.

4 ms·

</sarcasm>? If not, why do you think Starship is vaporware?

by okay_yes 11mo ago

</sarcasm>? If not, why do you think Starship is vaporware?

justapassenger 11mo ago
There are prototype that are called Starship. There's nothing even remotely reassembling what was advertised to the public (and sold to the government) as Starship. It's Duke Nukem Forever.
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > nothing even remotely reassembling what was advertised to the public (and sold to the government) as Starship If it can get its mass into orbit, it delivers what it sold. I'd currently put my money on a successful orbital launch of Starship before New Glenn re-flies a booster for a paying customer.
  - justapassenger 11mo ago
    US government didn't pay for getting its mass into orbit. Getting Starship to the orbit means that they have something called Starship in the orbit. It doesn't mean product that they sold isn't vaporware - what was sold with a name of Starship included much more things than getting stage 2 into orbit.
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      > what was sold with a name of Starship included much more things than getting stage 2 into orbit ...what was it? Are you talking about HLS? Propellant transfer? (The latter is absolutely "getting its mass into orbit.") Which of those has been either officially cancelled or had its delays materially impact the customer's timeline?
      - justapassenger 11mo ago
        None of them were cancelled. But none of them exist in any form or shape remotely reassembling the product - therefore - vaporware. It's that simple. But also, since you're telling me there had been no material impacts to the customers timelines, sorry, I don't think you're arguing in good faith, so I'm not going to engage here anymore.
        llbbdd 11mo ago
        In this thread your pedantic definition of vaporware seems to hinge on a compatibility between spec and delivery that has not existed once in the history of frontier engineering, so I'm not sure good faith is in high supply here in any case.