Cuky

Just because you are repeating that same thing every few pages in this thread doesn't make it correct. SpaceX wants reausable rocket to have higher profits because they can launch it often and multiple times without need to builed a new one. They are still making revenue from Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches and Starlink and investing that into R&D for Starship/Superheavy. They don't have to follow the same route they took with Falcon 9. When they made Falcon 9 they didn't have any revenue source. So they needed a rocket that could bring them in much needed cash they need to develop a reusable rocket. Now they don't need to waste time makin a disposable rocket when they have revenue from Falcon 9 lauches and they can from a get go do whatever they can afford. And what good would it be to have an operational rocket when it would cost a lot to fly? The whole point of developing Starship/Superheavy is to reduce launch cost as much as possible. You don't get that by discarding it after a single use.

Just managed to watch a replay since I fell asleep during countdown yesterday. I must admit it was pretty funny seing real life engineers loosing control of the vehicle in the same way all of us lost it in KSP

Both my cars and motorcycles exhausts make popping sounds after I shut engine off after a long ride and they start to cool off. Maybe those really was something exploding. But then again maybe those pops are just hot metal parts being cooled by deluge system or fire prevention

They are a privately owned company. They are under no obligation to share any technical info with us. Them sharing any technical info that they do (and they do quite a bit) is their good will.

Those Raptors on recovered Booster are already old news, Raptor 3 has already been designed and ia in production. So whatever they do with Raptor 2 engines, wether they melt them to make a molten engine puddle, uae them as Chriatmas tree ornaments or just throw them in the bin, speaks nothing about reusability of the Raptor.

finally they have some flight hardware. Hope they fly it soon and successfully... and that they make better coverage than for New Shepherd launches

In broadcast they said there was no plans to recover any hardware from starship ahter it tipped over and exploded

How many times will the whole industry go "eeerm what you are proposing is simply not possible" only for Spacex to nail it as they described that they will do. They said Indian ocean if I heard correct in the coverage

IMHO if tomorrow morning you come up with a way to get to the Moon and back for $1 million the SLS would still not be canceled. A ton of money has been spent on SLS, so they won't cancel it until they spend a ton more and get few launches out of it. Also, canceling SLS now would mean that a lot of contractors will have a lot less to do and good chunk of their work force would be out of job. And no administration would do that and risk loosing votes from those states in the future. Like it or not (and I am kinda on not side here) we are stuck with SLS until NASA lands few humans on the Moon.

It is not about going to the Moon, that has already been done half a century ago. It is about going to the Moon again and again and again and staying there and doing work or going for q nice spa day under the starry sky. And that won't happen if we just do what Apollo did.

According to Wikipedia it had one partial failure in 100 launches. And that is still as many lunches in 22 years as Falcon does in like 13-14 months I just hooe that this failure won't cause too long of a delay for them

But there is an elephant in the room: how do you fit astronauts in Boeing suits inside SpaceX seats and even more, how do you connect them to life support because I don't think umbilical found in Crew Dragon would be able to connect anywhere on Boeing suit.

I thinknhe is referring to troubkes around KSP2 and if this forum will survive all that. I myself really hooe it does. I don't post here often, but I do visit muktiple times a day for spaceflightand science news mostly.