Jump to content

RealKerbal3x

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,063

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by RealKerbal3x

  1. RealKerbal3x
    Thing is, if you're using only one engine the flip has to occur at a higher altitude, which means the flight computer would have to detect engine failures before they happen and adjust its landing accordingly.
  2. RealKerbal3x
    3/10 I haven't seen you much but at least I know you exist.
  3. RealKerbal3x
    Here's your lion. I wish for a successful Starship SN9 flight and landing.
  4. RealKerbal3x
    Honestly I don't really know. But given that their business is entirely government contracts, I wouldn't put ULA in the same category as SpaceX, Rocket Lab or Virgin Orbit.
  5. RealKerbal3x
    ULA is a conglomerate formed from Boeing and Lockheed Martin. I don't believe it's a commercial company as it basically operates off government contracts.
  6. RealKerbal3x
    Only the third commercial company to reach orbit!
  7. RealKerbal3x
    Aaaand Branson has beat Bezos to orbit.
  8. RealKerbal3x
    Liftoff! And max q: Stage sep!
  9. RealKerbal3x
  10. RealKerbal3x
    Eh, I'd still call SN8 a development test. Unlike SLS, they were deliberately pushing the limits with a vehicle nowhere near a finalised configuration, and fully expected it to fail at some point. It did validate a lot of Starship's flight envelope, but only because it got a lot further than they were expecting and gave them a load of data, which they were prepared to throw right back into the next prototype.
  11. RealKerbal3x
    I feel there's still one fundamental difference: the way the test was approached. As @RCgothic said previously, this was a validation test, not a developmental test as SpaceX is doing. It was meant to be right first time, and indeed we saw that the PR people on NASA's stream had no script for a early shutdown or other non-norminal outcome (they were calling it a successful test at the end of the stream despite it not reaching the minimum acceptable duration).
  12. RealKerbal3x
    Even if Starship ends up never launching anything to Mars, what's stopping it from being used to build a vehicle in LEO instead? It certainly seems like a better option than SLS - 1 year between launches means it'll take several years to complete, and by the time your MTV is ready to go all of its propellant will have boiled off. Only if it's available, and with SLS's timeline slipping further that's looking less and less likely. By the time any evolution that will make SLS useful for anything other than sending Orion to a distant lunar orbit is ready (like EUS), other options will be available. EUS is a long way away, and Block II is basically dead. What do you mean by this? Starship development seems to have gone pretty well thus far. Obviously it won't be ready to launch crew before SLS, but I doubt it will be a long time before Starship and/or other vehicles are ready to take humans to the Moon.
  13. RealKerbal3x
  14. RealKerbal3x
    Oof, that doesn't sound good.
  15. RealKerbal3x
    And shutdown at 60 seconds. Not sure if norminal or not.
  16. RealKerbal3x
    Ignition!
  17. RealKerbal3x
    SoonTM
  18. RealKerbal3x
    A nice rendering of the Artemis 1 launch:
  19. RealKerbal3x
    This is an amazing render:
  20. RealKerbal3x
    Nate, you're meant to guess who'll reply next! I'll just assume you guessed me. @Lewie
  21. RealKerbal3x
    Presumably 1.11.1, which will hopefully come out sometime in the next few days.
  22. RealKerbal3x
    @Stratzenblitz75 showed his support:
  23. RealKerbal3x
    spinning
  24. RealKerbal3x
    Clicks abound!
  25. RealKerbal3x
    I'm not an SLS fan but I'm pretty pumped for the Green Run:
×
×
  • Create New...