tater

Members
  • Content count

    9,522
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10,611 Excellent

About tater

  • Rank
    Rocket Surgeon

Profile Information

  • Location On the side of a mountain in New Mexico

Recent Profile Visitors

10,225 profile views
  1. They've likely dumped stage 3 now that stage 2 is hydrolox. The mass to LEO is likely better than it was with methlox, but I haven't seen numbers that big thrown around.
  2. Have you heard anyone say NG would put 70-90 tons in LEO as he says in that video?
  3. SpaceX Discussion Thread

    Yeah, obviously taken with a telephoto lens, if that is what you mean.
  4. ULA launch thread

    Yeah, the biggest issue is that Vulcan will be a reset on reliability for ULA. Right now they're the "when it absolutely, positively needs to get to space" provider. If all goes well, SpaceX will pass them in the next few years assuming their launch cadence only improves a little. Vulcan will have no history at all, which seems like it eliminates a huge selling point of ULA right now.
  5. Better Tech Tree

    The tech tree and career have been broken afterthoughts since added, and they're not going to change, sadly.
  6. Did y'all see who the new NASA director's gonna be?

    NASA is a STEM jobs program. The great science they do is an awesome side effect. Their job is to spend money, ideally in as many Congressional districts as possible. I think he'll be fine. He has a real interest in space, and is very friendly to commercial space, which in my opinion will do more to move us forward in space than NASA ever would alone.
  7. NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    Extant LVs includes FH now. In the timeframe of all up SLS/Orion flying, NG will also be flying, without question.
  8. ULA launch thread

  9. NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    One mission a year... would have been better off keeping Shuttle, making Shuttle C, or automating the orbiter after commercial crew could launch crew, then putting a spacecraft in the cargo bay to head for the Moon. Or loft crew on Atlas (planning pre-SpaceX), and loft a Centaur to send them to the Moon on another one. Many ways to do what SLS/Orion?DSG will do with extant LVs. Centaur/ACES enables all kinds of cislunar activity. Good cryo stages mean that you have no need for an Orion, propulsively enter LEO upon return (or otherwise brake for a lower energy entry). Certainly makes more sense, then, but you still then need to send giant, expensive Orion to get the stuff. If any other crew vehicle can ever make it to DSG in the next decade---Orion was a pointless waste of money.
  10. NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    No need for a station to control a robotic lander. Aiming at a 50% cost reduction on future spacecraft. Course the first one will have cost what, 17 B$?
  11. KSP Weekly: The Lunar Greenhouse

    Farmland in the UK is already "prepared," I'm thinking the SW Pacific, CBI, etc. New Mexico looks perfectly fine from the air, just land---you'd be mistaken, even with a ww1 biplane. The dirt/dust is soft, and there are deep ruts, prairie dog holes, etc, randomly, everywhere. The bottom line is that on Earth, the % of the untouched by humans surface that is acceptable to land even a rough-field aircraft is vanishingly small (land where no damage is possible). The % increases with human work on the land, but even then, most farmland is unavailable as well. Plowed field? Nope. Field with mature crops? Nope. Grazing land might be OK most places. What about Mars? My point is that the cue-ball nature of KSP planets obviates the need for proper landers.