Jump to content

CatastrophicFailure

Members
  • Posts

    7,136
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

19,101 Excellent

Contact Methods

  • Twitter
    https://twitter.com/KerbalNut

Profile Information

  • About me
    Wrestles with Krakens
  • Location
    I stoled this avatar.

Recent Profile Visitors

18,177 profile views
  1. Also, I'm not saying it was this, but neither can this be ruled out at this point either...
  2. Unconfirmed, yes, tho something like this does appear to be the case. The booster was under complete control via thrusters until the grid fins "kicked in." If you watch it sped up the control actually looks quite crisp, for a much larger and more massive vehicle vs an empty Starship. It looks to me like it wasn't a case of the SS thrusters not working well enough towards the end, they didn't seem to be working at all. Possibly with a leak of some sort adding in that uncontrolled roll. It's far too early to say if the boiloff-based thrusters work or not at this point. Tho I bet SpaceX themselves already know the solution. If I had this playing Kerbal, I'd rage quit for a few hours, come back, build an even BIGGER rocket, BRAKE IT TO A COMPLETE STOP 100km above KSC, bring it down under power the entire descent and land it directly on top of the VAB just to stick it to the game, laughing maniacally the whole time. ...Then rage quit again when it ever-so-slowly tips over and explodes literally everything.
  3. First Starlinks deployed NEED to have cameras tho. Just to make this a thing:
  4. There’s big ol’ Tesla batteries on board to power the grid find, TVC, etc. Tesla butt warmers work pretty good. Just sayin… I get into this on that other platform all the time. Artemis needs Starship to work. But the moment Starship does work, even partially, SLS becomes obsolete.
  5. Prolly just gonna use that island with the old abandoned airfield for now…
  6. I’m thinking not, since there’s no precautionary TFRs in the Pacific, at least not yet. My impression is they’re staying well suborbital, then burning normal/antinormal, prograde dive, etc, in such a way not to move the entry corridor much, specifically because they don’t want it coming down over Australia or such if the engine burn fails for any reason. First light of a Raptor in space & all. Now I’m wondering if that engine burn might be what actually moves the fuel transfer, too.
  7. Came here to say this (linky no worky ) in reference to: Largely I'd agree, but there ARE people entrenched within the bureaucracies who are, maybe even their superiors are, but everyone's had a bit too much "we've-been-here-before" over the decades about what's surely coming just over the next hill that never actually arrives (NASP anyone?). So they're afraid to seriously talk about it, as if even that much attention might make it all vanish like a dim star just in your periphery when you try to really see it, as so many have before. When Starship really and truly is here, the floodgates will open. IIRC an old UA-1205 Titan booster is around 250 tonnes. Expendable Starship can send 300 tonnes to just about anywhere. That's a whole lotta reliable, storable when-I-say-WHOAH-I-MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAN-WHOAH!!! once it gets there. With mass left. Just sayin...
  8. On the one hand, you have a commercial space startup on its very first mission making rookie errors as, well, a rookie (and still pulling off a mission success). On the other hand, you have the agency that arguably started spaceflight and should be the ol’ hoss at it making… rookie errors. Not just once, but a pattern, which points to deep systemic troubles within said agency…
  9. Perhaps only tangentially related at this point but dang this is an enlightening article:
  10. Sigh. Ninjad again. But @tater I’ll see that & raise you:
  11. Bezos is an easy target for snark, sure, but like or hate the guy do NOT underestimate him. Look at what he’s already built, he may or may not have done some questionable things to get it to that point but he is NOT stupid. He’s also got the resources as a result of that to be very, very patient. If he (and his team) say there’s an unseen market looking, I’m wont to believe that, especially when a certain other easy target for snark who’s also built impossible industries says similar. Probably easier overall. Doing everything vertical requires massive (read: expensive) buildings and cranes. Plus, there’s the added difficulty of a vertical transporter that can mount that not-insignificant incline up to the launch mount while also keeping the rocket perfectly vertical.
×
×
  • Create New...