** The Official Space Flight Thread - The Space Station and Beyond **

While I agree that politics should stay out of this thread, there wasn't anything wrong with pointing out the shifting timelines around getting to Mars...
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
Go back to speakers corner
Click to expand...

Can't, they banned me. :D

Chuk_Chuk said:
with your deranged rambling.
Click to expand...

Verifiable facts are not 'deranged rambling.' Musk is on video making these promises about putting men on Mars within specific timeframes. Meanhwhile, he can't even reach the moon, and struggles to get as far as low Earth orbit.
 
Last edited:
Penfold101 said:
It isn’t deranged rambling when every part of it is true. It also had nothing to do with the (utterly rubbish) article, so this has been a series of strange posts…
Click to expand...
don’t play dumb. He saw a terrible article that just wanted to bash Elon musks company and he decided he wanted to join in and do some Elon Musk bashing. We all know that is the actual reason for his post anyone pretending like it isnt, is a liar.

If you want to bash Elon musks we have threaded dedicated to that. He should go there.

P.s. nothing in the definition of deranged or rambling has anything to do with whether what they say is true or not so your first sentence is irrelevant.
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
don’t play dumb. He saw a terrible article that just wanted to bash Elon musks company and he decided he wanted to join in and do some Elon Musk bashing. We all know that is the actual reason for his post anyone pretending like it isnt, is a liar.

If you want to bash Elon musks we have threaded dedicated to that. He should go there.

P.s. nothing in the definition of deranged or rambling has anything to do with whether what they say is true or not so your first sentence is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Man, someone **** in your cornflakes this morning didn’t they :cry:
 
cricky i wasnt execting the reactions i got.
i was more pointing to the heavy lift calcualted as not being able to lift the 100tunnes based on calculations and at most projected to hit the 60Tunnes mark. and rightly or wrongly comparing it witht he Saturn MK Rocket lift system fro 50years ago.

its also imporant to note the 2 philosiphies in use :
test test test and retest before lift of for NASA who are very safety advers
&
Test to Distruction for SpaceX
both are valid

i understand its not a flattering article.
the article does forget SpaceX is the first comercial company to do what they are doing at least as far i am aware. + the reusablity aspect.
SpaceX has achieved much. Note i use SpaceX not Elon.
Elon may be a driving force but its really unclear how much design work he actually was invovled with other than from a high level techncial overview.
 
I think the StarShip V2 is capable of 100tonne to orbit. I think V1 had smaller propellant tanks as it was always a test article and they wanted to keep the inventory low during the riskier early launches. Certainly V2 has larger tanks than V1. The changed design has obviously caused problems, one wonders if some of these were not testable in a vertical 1G environment. I don't know what the thrust was like at the failure point it's not ridiculous to think that the loads either sub G or multiples of G changes the ship loading in a way that affects the harmonics.

It is very impressive that they have caught 3 of 4 attempted Super Heavy Boosters and the 4th was waved off for tower damage not a failure to catch. It was such a crazy idea when first proposed and now seems like genius.
 
PlacidCasual said:
It is very impressive that they have caught 3 of 4 attempted Super Heavy Boosters and the 4th was waved off for tower damage not a failure to catch. It was such a crazy idea when first proposed and now seems like genius.
Click to expand...
i wonder if a dual tower catch design might help mittigate some of th thrust damage as well as provide a backup for full loading ifa failure does happen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom