6 ms·

Holy cow. How are people downplaying something so revolutionary. Without those other tests SpaceX wouldn’t have done what it did today and they show progress ea

Holy cow. How are people downplaying something so revolutionary. Without those other tests SpaceX wouldn’t have done what it did today and they show progress each step. They are doing what nasa couldn’t (send stuff to space orders of magnitude cheaper) because they aren’t afraid to blow stuff up.

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
They haven't gotten to the revolutionary part yet (fuel tankers in orbit, raptor relight, reusable first stage, reentry).
- f-securus 3y ago
  Re-using rockets isn't revolutionary?
  - jordanb 3y ago
    I think it might have been back when the shuttle did it in 1981.
    - f-securus 3y ago
      The shuttle that cost 450 million per launch? (And disposable boosters)
      - paledot 3y ago
        The boosters parachuted to the ocean and were reused. Only the external fuel tank was not reusable. However, you're correct that the Shuttle failed utterly to realize the point of reusability, that being low cost and quick turnaround.
      - 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
        Moving the goalposts. I didn't say it wasn't revolutionary either, just that they haven't gotten to that part yet.
pclmulqdq 3y ago
Nobody has done anything revolutionary and nobody has gotten to space an order of magnitude cheaper. The best estimates of SpaceX's cost advantage per kilo put it at 30-50% better than a Soyuz. The Starship program so far has soaked up as much money as SLS, and hasn't even left orbit.
- jiggawatts 3y ago
  They did several revolutionary things with starship: Full-flow staged combustion metholox engines. Stainless steel construction. Biggest rocket to have ever flown. Highest thrust at launch of any rocket by a factor of two or so. Live streaming of reentry via a space Internet network. Etc…
  - pclmulqdq 3y ago
    Those all sound like incremental technology advances to me that have yet to deliver any real advances in capabilities. Which is nice - don't get me wrong - but not exactly worth rolling out the aircraft carrier for.
    - jiggawatts 3y ago
      Someone else in this thread pointed out that Starship could get the ISS built in just 3 launches! It originally took dozens. Quantity has a quality all of its own. You should be familiar with this from IT: there’s nothing fundamentally different about the first computer that I’ve ever used to the one I have right now, other than the factor of a million difference in performance!
      - pclmulqdq 3y ago
        Starship today can't launch anything. Saying that it can launch the ISS in 3 launches is what Elon Musk says it can do. I don't trust Elon Musk's word for things until I see what someone does with those words. Generally, he is off by a factor of 10-100 on his promises.

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago

They haven't gotten to the revolutionary part yet (fuel tankers in orbit, raptor relight, reusable first stage, reentry).

f-securus 3y ago
Re-using rockets isn't revolutionary?
- jordanb 3y ago
  I think it might have been back when the shuttle did it in 1981.
  - f-securus 3y ago
    The shuttle that cost 450 million per launch? (And disposable boosters)
    - paledot 3y ago
      The boosters parachuted to the ocean and were reused. Only the external fuel tank was not reusable. However, you're correct that the Shuttle failed utterly to realize the point of reusability, that being low cost and quick turnaround.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
      Moving the goalposts. I didn't say it wasn't revolutionary either, just that they haven't gotten to that part yet.

pclmulqdq 3y ago

Nobody has done anything revolutionary and nobody has gotten to space an order of magnitude cheaper. The best estimates of SpaceX's cost advantage per kilo put it at 30-50% better than a Soyuz. The Starship program so far has soaked up as much money as SLS, and hasn't even left orbit.

jiggawatts 3y ago
They did several revolutionary things with starship: Full-flow staged combustion metholox engines. Stainless steel construction. Biggest rocket to have ever flown. Highest thrust at launch of any rocket by a factor of two or so. Live streaming of reentry via a space Internet network. Etc…
- pclmulqdq 3y ago
  Those all sound like incremental technology advances to me that have yet to deliver any real advances in capabilities. Which is nice - don't get me wrong - but not exactly worth rolling out the aircraft carrier for.
  - jiggawatts 3y ago
    Someone else in this thread pointed out that Starship could get the ISS built in just 3 launches! It originally took dozens. Quantity has a quality all of its own. You should be familiar with this from IT: there’s nothing fundamentally different about the first computer that I’ve ever used to the one I have right now, other than the factor of a million difference in performance!
    - pclmulqdq 3y ago
      Starship today can't launch anything. Saying that it can launch the ISS in 3 launches is what Elon Musk says it can do. I don't trust Elon Musk's word for things until I see what someone does with those words. Generally, he is off by a factor of 10-100 on his promises.