Jump to content

SpaceX Discussion Thread


Skylon
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, SpaceFace545 said:

I really just don't like it. It just seems kinda oversaturated and not really that special. I don't know if other people have this same feeling but I do. I love watching launches from ULA or Ariane space because every launch is something special, wether it is some DOD satellite that can read the newspaper on my driveway or the super advanced probes from NASA and ESA. But with commercial launches its just repetitive, you know?

It's indeed ugly and it looks old-school and like they patched it together with a hammer; it's certainly not winning any beauty contests and perhaps it never will.

I'll definitely agree that sending anything to space; many-billion dollar probes on many-hundred-million-dollar sweet-looking rockets in your examples, is indeed special. I'll argue however, that sending whatevertf you want, whenevertf you want, for a tiny fraction of the price is even more so.   

Butt-ugly as it may be, Starship is at the very least showing that this is within reach.

Besides, if SpaceX really wants to drop some panties, they can always add some bling-bling and window-dressing to the Starhip later. They'll certainly have the margin for it. 

Edited by Lukaszenko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone know whether Canaveral/Kennedy have to work around Cruise ship schedules?  Absent Covid restrictions, there's a LOT of activity that goes in and out of Port Canaveral on a daily basis.

Or do these TFR and surface restrictions take precedence over normal commercial activity to the point of 'just deal with it'? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Spaceman.Spiff said:

This whole starbase stuff needs to stop. spacex needs to get their own land. They feel entitled like they can uproot an entire town just for a rocket and swear to god if they are allowed to fill up that beautiful marsh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Spaceman.Spiff said:

Fricken BO is doing the same thing with a wetland in florida

Its truly unacceptable what these two turds are doing to prestene wildlife habitats. Why can't they build their rockets in the middle of the desert like everyone else does?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lukaszenko said:

It's indeed ugly and it looks old-school and like they patched it together with a hammer; it's certainly not winning any beauty contests and perhaps it never will.

I'll definitely agree that sending anything to space; many-billion dollar probes on many-hundred-million-dollar sweet-looking rockets in your examples, is indeed special. I'll argue however, that sending whatevertf you want, whenevertf you want, for a tiny fraction of the price is even more so.   

It reminds me of the short story Superiority by Arthur C Clarke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SpaceFace545 said:

desert like everyone else does?

The Russians*

Because ideally they want to be on the coast so that they dont drop stages over land, or if they explode they wont rain debris on a populated area.

But: Destroying wetlands is bad. They should feel bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Spaceman.Spiff said:

The Russians*

Because ideally they want to be on the coast so that they dont drop stages over land, or if they explode they wont rain debris on a populated area.

But: Destroying wetlands is bad. They should feel bad.

I mean more like white sands, literally in the middle of nowhere. But instead they rain debris on scarce habitats which are home to some very endangered* animals.

*I'm not really sure if the animals are endangered but these wetland environments definitely are.

3 minutes ago, JcoolTheShipbuilder said:

i dont think sand is good for rockets

then that powder sand from the texas coastline is definitely not good for starship then

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure Cape Canaveral was a pristine wetland before they decided to build a ton of launch pads on top of it.

There's only so much empty US coastline available to build launch sites. Unfortunately, a lot of that coastline is going to be wetlands. Launching from the desert is an option, but then you run the risk of flying over the continental US and/or having a limited set of orbital inclinations available to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, RealKerbal3x said:

There's only so much empty US coastline available to build launch sites. Unfortunately, a lot of that coastline is going to be wetlands. Launching from the desert is an option, but then you run the risk of flying over the continental US and/or having a limited set of orbital inclinations available to you.

I have some issues with said coastline being merely 3 miles away from the coastline of a completely different country altogether though.

20 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

It's truly unacceptable what these two turds are doing to pristine wildlife habitats.

... That's already receding anyway because of raised sea level. It's not as pristine as one might like to think.

I say you better use them and fortify them.

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RCgothic said:

Sometimes a big infrastructure project comes along and people have to move.

Exactly. It's a trade-off - if Starship works as intended, then the implications of that are way more important than a tiny village and a few square kilometres of wetland. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SpaceFace545 said:

This whole starbase stuff needs to stop. spacex needs to get their own land. They feel entitled like they can uproot an entire town just for a rocket and swear to god if they are allowed to fill up that beautiful marsh.

That's the problem though. All the land has been swallowed up by other people. So if they want SpaceX to leave them alone, either wait patiently for SpaceX to move offshore, or sell it off. Move to Florida, you got tourists, move to Desert, you have paranoid militaries. Move to ocean, and the environmentalists will burn you alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People don’t have to sell. Some haven’t. The “town” is ~40 houses.

the whole SpaceX facility in Boca Chica is a few hundred acres? Less? 

Bezos flew around TX in a helo looking at land. He bought >400,000 acres under shell company names so they’d not see what he was doing and charge more. That’s the BO facility near Van Horn, TX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, YNM said:

I mean... it's not their jurisdiction anymore ? Like FAA has no jurisdiction over Mexican airspace, right ?

If a US company were to fly rockets from Mexico, they would still be under FAA jurisdiction. Look at Rocket Lab, they fly Electron from New Zealand, but since they're incorporated in the US, they still have to get FAA permission.

But SpaceX is still operating in US territory and airspace. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, YNM said:

I mean... it's not their jurisdiction anymore ? Like FAA has no jurisdiction over Mexican airspace, right ?

Maybe, but unless they want to do polar orbits from Boca Chica they won't ever pass there, no?

Edited by Beccab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...