Canopus

Wow i don‘t know what to think, say or do. I didn‘t even consider there to even be a sequel. I am beyond excited to see where KSP goes, having witnessed its very early stages in 2011. It‘s been an exciting journey and it seems there is no end in sight.

For the same reason i think the Zoo Hypothesis is invalid, because there could always be a rogue element not adhering to a "prime directive".

The Idea of using "Mooncrete" is far older than the Boring Company. Using simple bags filled with Moondust seems far easier though, atleast until you bring a furnace.

@kerbiloid the B330 has a rigid core.

or Composite Condor, wonder whats going to happen to it now.

A true Starship, as in a vessel that crosses the distance between stars in a reasonable timespan, will most likely be extremely thin, almost pencil-like as to hide its structure behind a long whipple-shield. Also i don't think the ability to best hold pressure will ever dictate how a spacecraft will look overall, since there is no need for the whole structure to be pressurized.

By the time they can refuel from the moon i doubt the ascender would still be a separate stage from the Lander. You could probably just mount a cabin on the Landing stage as cargo.

Nasa has no colonization ambitions, And while SpaceX may say their end goal is to have a Mars base, they still need money to accomplish that. When SpaceX talks about Mars, it‘s for PR purposes, since the meme of a mars colony has a large distribution in culture.

@DNKKING i don‘t see how Mars is going to provide prosperity, you are certainly not going to transport anything created on Mars back to earth, Mars would be a money pit for decades before you‘d make any money from it and sadly, money is the biggest driving factor for our society.

It isn't though. It sits right on our doorstep and thats what makes it one of the most important bodies in our solar system But they are at the bottom of earths steep gravity well and bringing them on mass into orbit is complicated and expensive. When you can bring the bulk of raw materials you need from the moon, it's not going to hurt you to bring the small rest from the earth.

I‘m on #teammoon, it‘s closer therefore safer for the foreseeable future, it‘s got resources to base an economy around while also benefiting the earth thanks to it‘s proximity. If you want to have something permanent in space that may drive an eventual expansion beyond, you want a cislunar industry. There won‘t be an exodus to mars anyway even if it got anything you need to live, simply because it is much more unpleasant than any of the empty places on earth. Bonus point: you can stand on the surface of the moon and admire our blue planet.

I don‘t think they will ask anyone to fly to the moon. Shackleton might be a name for a manned lunar Lander they propose, or even just the name for their recovery ship

@satnet easily the best answer.

@sh1pman It’s great that no one was harmed, on the other hand, they had years of testing, this problem appearing now seems like it could be a big setback.

Interesting that now both Boeing and SpaceX had a failure in their liquid propellant fueled LES system. Might have all went a little faster with the good old Solids.