Wjolcz

Dat game better have hoses yo

So they are doing the hop after all. I thought they were going for the orbit straight away. Still sooner than SLS (hopefully).

That's actually one thing I've been thinking about too. The cycles must've overlapped some time in the past and some civilization must've had noticed that. The star is visibly dimmer right now. If we can clearly see it without any special equipment then pretty much every astronomer/astrologist would do too, yet there is no evidence.

I know why nobody made a Betelgeuse thread yet: we are all pretty sure this unusual dip in brightness won't end with a firework show. However, I still think it's pretty interesting and a bit mysterious (but then it's probably the result of two dipping cycles' minimums overlapping), so I decided to share a couple of things with you. Here's a twitter bot with daily updates: https://mobile.twitter.com/betelbot?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-1791624860461792108.ampproject.net%2F2001251659540%2Fframe.html And here's a prediction:

Radioactive area? I'm guessing X-rays for checking welds?

Exactly. The new launchers wouldn't be a threat because of this (maybe except for New Glenn). But that's really because nobody ever was as quick and successful with reuse as SpaceX is now. I don't think the monopoly is bad when the prices are low but when they only rise (*cough* Boeing *cough*). Elon's goal was always cheap access to space. As long as he doesn't become a Bond villain (seems like he's way too chill for that for now) I'm fine with that. And, realistically, I don't think any monopoly would last too long since there are other companies and agencies working on reusable rockets as we speak. Besides, IIRC he said he made/wanted to make sure that SpaceX continues its mission even if he dies too soon. I think that says a lot about his mindset. He clearly doesn't want monopoly but actual competition (<- pretty sure he said that too).

Wow. Wow x2 Yeah, saying that F9 is >30mln per launch is really bad for the business. Though, if companies start demanding even lower prices for SpaceX's services and they agree (but I really doubt they will since they already are the cheapest) such cost reduction could really mess with the competition since there's no way others can reduce launch costs that much.

SN1 seems to be three rings tall already.

As if science wasn't horrible enough. Instead of flooding players with even more cookie clicker-like gizmos the game should allow them to pick their own goals and reward them for it. I disabled science points from my career almost entirely (because you can't set the rewards to 0%) and the career mode has finally become enjoyable. What I do is I look at the tree and think "What can I do with what I already have and where should I go next?". I pick the target, like The Mun, land there, plant a flag, go back and get paid for it. THEN, I use that money to buy science and unlock new parts that I need to do my next goal set up by myself, not the game. All that without even touching the BS that the science system is.

IMO there should be one contract per each body with all the available objectives in it. So, each time you fulfill one of the objectives you get paid for it (just like it is now). And then the rest of the stuff, like part testing and tourism should have its own tab in the mission control.

I would hate that even more than what currently the science+tech system is. Stock career already forces players to achieve their (or rather game's) goals by building half-assed spacecraft AND only then they are able to use parts they needed to do the same mission properly. There's a simple way to fix the tree and that's by buying the nodes with money and having science objectives as a part of contracts. If you don't believe me just set the science values to minimum and download the KerboKatz sciencr exchanger mod. It just fixes the game (though I also use the historical tree mod because it makes actual sense unlike the stock one).

New flaps?

Doesn't that depend on the orbit itself? The landing site, too?

What if... ...I'm just a brain in a jar and nothing is real, even this thread?

I had that thought a while back. Nobody would allow that kind of thing.

Oh, crap. I thought we were talking about FL not LA. My bad.

A Raptor has been spotted in BC. Maybe it's exclusively for Starships that will launch NASA/commercial payloads. I'd think that Boca Chica doesn't have the infrastructure for scientific payloads. It seems like they invested quite a lot in BC too and they want to invest even more given the buy out proposals in the nearby town (unless that's somehow not a thing anymore?). Anyway, I don't think BC will shut down once they stop making prototypes there. Both facilities might be active for a long time after all the prototyping is done. Even if they stop building them they will produce parts there and ship them to FL for quick assembly Willow Run-style.

My guess is they spent money on them because reusability is profitable enough that catching fairings is an extra thing that's not necessarily needed, so they are trying it anyway.

Another happy landing. Just 4 years ago this thread would explode each time a rocket had landed. Now we're one landing away from 50. Edit: we should make some sort of list of what's not impossible and untrue anymore.

I honestly start thinking it would've been cheaper and faster to build a dedicated non-reusable BFR-like rocket and put a solid, one piece mirror on that thing as the payload.

Unless crew starship actually works. It probably will, just not in time to be useful during Artemis.

Still 1 bar short of the goal (8.5). But cryo temperatures make that type of steel withstand more, right?

Another baby tank is on the launch pad in BC.

They tested the nosecone and either it went so well that it didn't get destroyed or the damage wasn't visible, or the tanks weren't pushed to their limits.

Well, that reminds me of MY favourite company which is way ahead of yours: