And we have liftoff

[Lazaran]

Blue Origin (Amazon), Lockheed Martin, Boeing...and, in a sense, NASA.



I can't stand Elon. However, so far, this particular project is exceeding expectations to the nth degree. It seemed like a snake-oil pitch - the results have proven it's the real deal, and then some.

NASA previously said what's been done already couldn't be done.

I don’t see any other outfit sending up anything like “Starship”.



Also:

“Starship” hasn’t accomplished anything to date.

When I see “Starship” put multiple heavy payloads / large crews into space (let alone, colonization of Mars) and realize the promise of genuine “reusability” (exponentially better than the space shuttle / as safe as airline travel), then I will acknowledge some measure of actual achievement.

So far??? Meh.

Side note:

Nothing Musk has done in the technology field holds a candle to curing cancer, etc. (Musk has actually been a net negative for humanity imho)

Space tourism, etc, is a rich tech-bros lark, akin to yacht racing, and has a high potential for tragically spectacular failure which could result in humans being trapped on earth forever due to clouds of debris encircling the earth.

This reach seems to exceed our current grasp, and yet, arrogant and pathologically ambitious tools, like Musk, etc, are reaching for the brass ring.

What could possibly go wrong???

 

[RoryN]

I don’t see any other outfit sending up anything like “Starship”.

Correct: no one else has been able to make a completely-reusable deep-space transporter work.

“Starship” hasn’t accomplished anything to date.

False.

When I see “Starship” put multiple heavy payloads / large crews into space (let alone, colonization of Mars) and realize the promise of genuine “reusability” (exponentially better than the space shuttle / as safe as airline travel), then I will acknowledge some measure of actual achievement.

So far??? Meh.

This suggests you won't actually acknowledge any achievement in this area under any conditions. And, if it's "meh" so far, you're not paying attention.

Space tourism

This isn't about space tourism.

No one has yet to make a counter-argument against the program in this thread that isn't based solely on Musk hatred, and/or a pre-existing bias against focus on space exploration.

 

[LLCox]

I don’t see any other outfit sending up anything like “Starship”.



Also:

“Starship” hasn’t accomplished anything to date.

When I see “Starship” put multiple heavy payloads / large crews into space (let alone, colonization of Mars) and realize the promise of genuine “reusability” (exponentially better than the space shuttle / as safe as airline travel), then I will acknowledge some measure of actual achievement.

So far??? Meh.

Side note:

Nothing Musk has done in the technology field holds a candle to curing cancer, etc. (Musk has actually been a net negative for humanity imho)

Space tourism, etc, is a rich tech-bros lark, akin to yacht racing, and has a high potential for tragically spectacular failure which could result in humans being trapped on earth forever due to clouds of debris encircling the earth.

This reach seems to exceed our current grasp, and yet, arrogant and pathologically ambitious tools, like Musk, etc, are reaching for the brass ring.

What could possibly go wrong???

What ave you done lately beside post 24/7/365 on a porn board.

 

[Lazaran]

What ave you done lately beside post 24/7/365 on a porn board.

I’ve done far less harm to humanity / society than Musk.

In fact, my work in security and public safety and treating the mentally ill has easily contributed far more good to humanity/ society than harm.

Hope that ^ helps.

 

[Lazaran]

Correct: no one else has been able to make a completely-reusable deep-space transporter work.



False.



This suggests you won't actually acknowledge any achievement in this area under any conditions. And, if it's "meh" so far, you're not paying attention.



This isn't about space tourism.

No one has yet to make a counter-argument against the program in this thread that isn't based solely on Musk hatred, and/or a pre-existing bias against focus on space exploration.

1) Musk has a track record of “reach exceeding grasp”.

2) “Starship” hasn’t accomplished a fraction of what the Space Shuttle already did.

3) I’m all for space exploration if it’s done sensibly / pragmatically. Musk’s “Starship” has all the hallmarks of a vanity project, imho.

 

[LLCox]

I’ve done far less harm to humanity / society than Musk.

In fact, my work in security and public safety and treating the mentally ill has easily contributed far more good to humanity/ society than harm.

Hope that ^ helps.

Yes they get a LOT of work out of you. I'd have fired you a long time ago. You are like a sucker fish on a shark.

 

[Lazaran]

Yes they get a LOT of work out of you. I'd have fired you a long time ago. You are like a sucker fish on a shark.

I’m retired.



Now I just volunteer my time to service when it suits me.



And yes, I do consider my time spent here offering feedback a form of mental health service.



Ironically, you’re the “sucker fish” getting the freebie from the shark.

 

[astuffedshirt_perv]

With Musk involved, I suspect the results of the “Starship” program will be the techno- snake oil salesman’s standard “over-promised (hyped), under-delivered” product.

What an uninformed statement. While starship, the latest in the elon line, is still in development, the company has markedly reduced the $/Kg cost to orbit with their other launch system compared to just a few years ago. Lots of competition in that arena now, and putting things in orbit is getting dramatically cheaper. From like $10K/Kg 15 years ago to like $2.5K/Kg now. Huge.

 

[RoryN]

"Starship” hasn’t accomplished a fraction of what the Space Shuttle already did.

It's already accomplished major milestones the Shuttle never did...and it's still a prototype.

I’m all for space exploration if it’s done sensibly / pragmatically.

Nothing more sensible than an entirely-reusable craft (which Shuttle was not) that can carry umpteenth times more payload while costing millions less to operate - and able to travel to deep space (which Shuttle couldn't).

 

[colddiesel]

All I know...is our Govt can't pay its bills...and yet we have given 15.8 billion in public funding to SpaceX since 2003. Guess how much Tesla has received. If we get something for that investment...cool. But 20 years down the road...I don't want to see "boom".

The Government: both parties has given ten times as much ($150 Billion) to the 3 major (non Tesla) auto manufacturers since 2008 and they still make expensive, overpriced, poor quality junk to give US citizens a kick in the pants without the slightest chance of it being paid back. Space X at least looks to the future without subsidising a failed past.

I dunno what the returns will be but based on the previous space programmes this is dirt cheap R & D.

 

[RoryN]

With regards to the Space Shuttle: yesterday, hot plasma entered one of the Starship's wings and tore it to pieces. It still was able to make a controlled landing, intact. Columbia had the same thing happen, and was destroyed.

 

[RoryN]

Biggest rocket ever does controlled soft landing into the ocean:

 

[RoryN]

Bad morning for you if you're rooting against this program...wow.

 

[RoryN]

Space travel just changed forever!

 

[RoryN]

NASA = never the same.
Boeing = likely out as supplier to NASA.
Other suppliers = new bar set.
Return to moon = new timeframe.
Mars = on the table.

...all because of what just happened.

They caught it on the first try.

Transformative.

 

[RoryN]

Ship landed on target too.

Billions more will now pour into this program.

 

[RoryN]

Not often that words fail me, but...

 

[Lazaran]

Not often that words fail me, but...

The Titan submersible did some amazing things too…



The latest tech is still tech, and prone to failure.

As to your other recent posts:

And???



What is the end results and returns???



Also:

I won’t even say that SpaceX is "better" than NASA or Boeing, because they have had their own failures, and they don’t have nearly the track record to scrutinize. And SpaceX is also in the "prove it" phase of their endeavors, which has every employee working at peak levels. Once things settle into the daily operations of a business model and the fleet of vehicles & equipment experience wear and tear, there WILL be grand failures. Will there be a “Starship” failure with a couple hundred passengers that mirrors the “Titan” submersible failure???



Definitely, imho.



Side note:

This seems like a “look at the (literally) shiny object” play by Leon, as other things in his world are falling apart. (Leon also marched out some robots the other day.)



“Starship” is about as relevant and necessary to the average person as a Bugatti Veyron.

Color me NOT all that impressed, when there are other far more important things to be focused on, imho. (Like climate change, which thousands of rocket launches a year will almost certainly exacerbate.)



Cool video though…

 

[RoryN]

Math from RealClearDefense.com on launch costs per kilogram to space:

Space Shuttle: $25,000
Falcon 9: $2,720
Starship: $200

 

[Lance_Castro]

Will Herr Musk be a 4 Star Space Force General?

 

[RoryN]

Welp, so much for any remaining obscurity...Starship was mentioned in Trump's victory speech last night.

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

 

[RoryN]

Trump scheduled to attend Starship test launch tomorrow.

For better or worse, this will set the stage for the Starship program to take over NASA. It might have happened anyhow given NASA's recent failures, but the ballgame is almost guaranteed to change now. We'll see how the rocket does this week.

To say it's a fascinating time for our space travel program is a gross understatement.