sh1pman

MKS, obviously, since you're already using USI-LS. I'd also get a planet pack, like OPM, to colonize as many planets as I can.

Yeah, maybe you're right. I was just doing some actual scientific experiments in my lab and trying to figure out why they didn't work, feeling embarrassed about it a little bit. And then I saw this nonsense about science being "wrong". Hit a nerve, so to speak.

Both. Musky will win when BFR becomes a thing. NASA will win because it'll be able to ditch the SLS and save billions for useful purposes.

Seriously though, how is this thread still in "Science" section? OP clearly disregards and disrespects science, it would be fitting to move the thread to "Forum games" or something like that. There is no law in physics that would allow reactionless drives, and "we don't know everything yet" is not an argument.

If an NTR-powered rocket is ever built, it should be called Neutron.

Reposting the full video here, since the livestream link that I posted isn’t working anymore. In case someone didn’t see it. Interesting stuff is in the first 20ish minutes. Sound is still horrible though.

I’ll take symbiosis if another option is extinction.

(the sound is horrible) Mars colonization summary from Elon himself: "Difficult, dangerous, good chance you'll die" Short BFR flights in the first half of 2019. Full reusability will reduce the cost to space by an order of magnitude. BFR cost per flight less than $5M

Being mad about some strangers not giving you free stuff at a moment’s notice is weird.

It had awesome kerolox pyre.

Yea. Logging out and back in fixed it for me on PC. Not on the phone though.

Funny, because for me it's unusable on all of my iOS devices. Chrome on Win10 works now, but it didn't 5 minutes ago.

FH in fully reusable mode isn't that much of an improvement over expendable F9 in terms of lift to GTO. As a customer, I'd rather choose an F9, since it's 50% 30% cheaper.

That’s some seriously cool stuff, but... I’d rather see stock delta-v and TWR readout than all of 1.4 and Making History stuff combined.

I think that 62M price tag is only for payloads where booster recovery is possible. That’s why the contract prices are higher on average: some of them fly expendable, costing more to SpaceX, which in turn charges more for launch. No idea how much more, but if FH with 3 recovered boosters costs 90M, and something like 150M expendable, then one recovered booster should amount to something like 20M savings to SpaceX, more or less. Probably a bit less because of extra recovery and refurbishment costs. That brings F9 expendable cost to ~80M per launch. I don’t think there’s a discount for flying on a reused booster. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/12/elon-musk-spacex-falcon-heavy-costs-150-million-at-most.html

But they did this sort of fake landing before with aluminum fins, and it worked great.

Noooo, titanium fins! Doomed! Couldn’t they, I dunno, replace them with aluminum ones during the hold-up? What a waste!

Sea sickness is just an excuse, the real reason is that it’s afraid to go out after being bombed by FH central core Landing during a thunderstorm would surely be awesome to watch though.

Honestly, I've never thought that my KSP purchase would after many years lead to me being really concerned whether some ships left their port or not.

If there was such a demand, they’d do it. They’re going to need rendezvous and autonomous docking for BFR anyway. If BFR wasn’t in the plans, it would even be a sensible thing to do, along with extending S2 and maybe trying orbital refueling with it.

Not really major, just a payload mating adapter for FH S2. Launch a Europa Clipper on F9 and one FH with no payload and this custom adapter. The S2 will have something like 90t of propellant once in orbit. Dock it with the Clipper, do the burn, decouple the S2. Done.

Whole bunch of revolutionary rockets coming in early-mid-20s. Then NASA will finally scrap SLS and just buy rides on those.

Well, crappy quality standards are mostly limited to Khrunichev (that makes Protons) and Lavochkin (Fregat upper stages) centers. With military tech, I think the quality standards are quite a bit better. (if you fail to meet them, you disappear-kind of standards)

Maybe they decided against the crazy hot recovery idea.

I don't think they need to mass produce these things. Since these missiles carry nuclear payload, only a couple of them are needed, and only in case of a nuclear war. No point in wasting hundreds of them to kill some terrorists in some desert.