Jump to content

.50calBMG

Members
  • Posts

    241
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by .50calBMG

  1. Man, that's way cooler looking than in the original video for some reason. Can't wait to see it for real now.
  2. This is what Tater and I have repeated over and over again. While SLS components exist, they haven't been fully tested together, and the only useful versions of SLS are still nothing but PowerPoints right now, and for the foreseeable future, seeing as IIRC Boeing is the one "building" EUS
  3. But Orion isn't fully tested. It isn't getting life support integrated until flight two, and IIRC they are switching it's heatshield after A1 as well
  4. Man, it really is impressive just how much can be spent on basically nothing
  5. Well, I'm gonna start saying Starliner Launch Service. If it's starting to look and act like it's bigger brother, we might as well call them both SLS. Oh, hey, look at that, both have Boeing as a prime contractor, it can't be a coincidence.
  6. I would like to reiterate that Boeing got more than twice the money SpaceX got so they could compete "fairly" against them, and IIRC so they could be ready first...
  7. Does the word pre-alpha mean anything to you? I remember a time when DCS World was a stuttery mess that looked as bad if not worse than ksp 1 in beta, and that was an engine specifically designed for it. Now, DCS is arguably the best looking flight sim you can play, just because they had time to work on it. I have serious doubts that KSP 2 at release will look like it does in the pre-alpha gameplay.
  8. I believe they also said that plume expansion at lower atmospheric pressure (aka real plume) is going to be a thing in stock as well. If we could get plume-plume interaction on vessels with multiple engines, that would be pretty great.
  9. He literally put that he was being sarcastic in the post. Back on topic, this should be a neat little bird to watch, what with the blue exhaust and all.
  10. I think the booster actually survived that flip, that was too fast an explosion to be an aerodynamic breakup.
  11. Everyone makes fun of the windows breaking from the ball, and it bothers me. It survived the test before they threw it at the actual truck windows (sure, they got rid of some of the stress by taking the clamps off). Seems to me like they are still stronger than normal, I bet that ball would have gone right through any other car side window. They stopped the ball, and that's the part that actually matters. Besides, it's not like bulletproof windows look pristine after they get shot.
  12. Sorry if this has been asked before, but is there a way to re-enable the G limiter for PVG?
  13. But starship doesn't fly that way. It falls like a skydiver. It doesn't have the proper control surfaces to fly like that. The only time it will be flying somewhat nose first is on re-entry, but still at such a high AOA that the lift coming from the body is a secondary side effect from coming into the atmosphere at an angle, which will happen to basically any shape moving that quickly.
  14. You would think. The way it's being stated though makes it seem like Boeing is still going to be losing money even with the extra funding. They said they needed it just to compete with SpaceX
  15. I believe the current MVac can throttle, but not quite as deeply as the SL versions, ~40% IIRC.
  16. Presumably it starts sooner because IIRC Falcon Heavy has a TWR of close to 2 at liftoff, and it is going faster through a denser part of the atmosphere.
  17. Also probably doesn't have the inside pressurized like it would be in vacuum. It won't be as bad as the first EVA suits, but it will still probably have some effect on mobility
  18. I was able to notice the difference going from a 2.5x to a 3.2x scale when I first started playing, and that's not even close to the amount that you want to change it, so I would bet that every single person would notice it. As someone who plays exclusively RSS with RO, I physically cannot play the stock system anymore because it's too small.
  19. Yeah, I would have posted much sooner, but every time I went to do so, tater got there a few minutes before me with basically the same points. It has been pretty civil though, you paying attention, rest of the world? Not that hard.
  20. @ZooNamedGames Thank you for not misinterpreting that as an attack and for providing a logical explanation instead of the "do as he says, but not as he does" excuse. I am well aware that it's politics that is currently drowning SLS, but I try to stay as far from politics as possible because nothing ever ends well after bringing it up. I am also not in the "Elon is God emperor of humanity" camp either. There are definitely faults with every program. For example, SpaceX is essentially building a MiG-21 as a test platform for something more akin to... Well... A space shuttle, and I am amazed they haven't had more problems than they have.
  21. I'm not upset by it, I just don't understand it. However, there is factual evidence supporting the fact that SLS has been mismanaged, is over budget, is years behind schedule, and sucking money from other, more promising programs while starship hasn't cost a thing to any other NASA project. Also, just because I called it "old and archaic" doesn't mean I hate it. Soyuz will never ceases to amaze me that not only is it still flying, but that it meets all the requirements set for it to this day (and that it looks so good doing it). I only call SLS that because there is literally not a single new piece of technology on it.
  22. @Dale Christopher That made me smile after an 11 hour workday with no lunch. Have a... Wait, they sill haven't gotten likes working yet... Have something that you didn't have before and is up to you to interpret. Just remember it was from me. And here's that video that basically furthers my points further. Thanks mister "fly safe" man https://youtu.be/z49eVQ6LxIE
  23. I think SLS will be forced to fly a few times only because so much has been wasted spent on its development that it sort of has to. Look at the backlash on constellation when it got axed after the Ares 1x flew. I think starship is going to be better in every meaningful way than SLS except for payload volume to orbit, but only if the EUS gets built, which at this point seems unlikely. Even though the payload mass has shrunk vs the original 12m version, it's still twice what the block 1 SLS can do, and for a fraction of the cost. You are vehemently defending an outdated, over-budget, and arguably useless (B1) rocket that is in and of itself an old, almost archaic design against something on the bleeding edge of technology and vastly more capable, while not only being more affordable to launch, but cheaper and faster to develope. So what if the design changes a few times before it gets finalized. SLS isn't the same now as the original proposal. @ZooNamedGames I don't mean this as a post to attack you by any means, but more because I don't understand your viewpoint. I don't get why you feel the need to attack SpaceX just because it isn't SLS. What's the point of attacking SpaceX when they are not even really competing against SLS, or even NASA?
  24. Been a while since I've wanted to like something this much
×
×
  • Create New...