SpaceX Rocket...Explodes

[22lcidw]

Twitter is going through a rough patch because Musk is barely capable of meaningful human interaction and is the worst person to run a social media platform.

I’m not pissed the government is using contractors, I’m pissed they’re finding starship as a lunar lander when it’s so clearly unfit for the task and is so incredibly early in development. NASA throws away far too much money and it just pisses me off when they continue to do so.

NASA should have chosen a rational lander design. They reason they didn’t was because Musk undercut the bids so much since he was desperate for funding, but it’s pretty clear that he’ll never be able to deliver in any reasonable timeline so NASA had to go back to Congress and ask for more money to fund another project.

It’s so stupid it hurts.

NASA could not even get astronauts into space and to the space station on its own. Musk saved their asses. We need to find cheaper ways to get into space.

 

[Marener]

You see no sense, I see good practice.

Plus government-private industry cooperation, which is going to be the way forward with space travel.

Looking forward to the Space Force's version of rescue rockets being on 48 hour standby like a Coast Guard for Space.

Moron. This isn’t about whether use of corporate contractors is good. It’s about whether SpaceX’s proposal was good. It’s not. It’s terrible. The only reason the government went with it is because Musk undercut everyone so much and Congress provided so little funding. It’s not a bargain when you realize that Starship is never going to be ready at any reasonable time frame if at all and NASA is going to continue shoveling money into it because they’re beholden to the sunk cost fallacy.

 

[martybegan]

2011.

However, unlike Starship it did not explode.

In the same way, the Apollo Program started in 1961, and landed on the moon in 1969. It had 32 launches, two partial failures and no catastrophic failures.

In comparison, the N1 was started in 1961 just weeks after the Apollo Program was announced. They had 4 launches between 1969 and 1972 and 4 failures.

So if you are trying to prove a point, you are actually more than anything else proving the point against what you are trying to claim.

And the thrust is meaningless if it is more likely to explode than make it into orbit.

First launch, and Musk has shown exploding rockets early on leads to safe rockets later on.

He doesn't have the initial safety parameters NASA does when testing new tech on crewless launches. That's a benefit, not a detriment, giving him tons of data on actual failures, which if you ever watched Air Disasters, shows that failure analysis gives you far more information than simulating failures.

 

[Marener]

NASA could not even get astronauts into space and to the space station on its own. Musk saved their asses. We need to find cheaper ways to get into space.

NASA currently has a rocket and a capsule that can take humans to the moon. All they need is a lander.

When do you think SpaceX is going to deliver that lander?

 

[martybegan]

NASA currently has a rocket and a capsule that can take humans to the moon. All they need is a lander.

When do you think SpaceX is going to deliver that lander?

What do you think will be the bigger delay, NASA's end or SpaceX's?

Also, the question is moot of the FAA decides to squash Musk's launch authorization due to political reasons.

 

[Marener]

First launch, and Musk has shown exploding rockets early on leads to safe rockets later on.

He doesn't have the initial safety parameters NASA does when testing new tech on crewless launches. That's a benefit, not a detriment, giving him tons of data on actual failures, which if you ever watched Air Disasters, shows that failure analysis gives you far more information than simulating failures.

He couldn’t even get the launch pad right.

These failures are expensive and slow. It’s one thing to tolerate repetitive failures when he’s launching a small falcon 1. It’s a different thing when he’s destroying 39 engines and destroying his launchpad every time he fails.

We don’t need a rocket. We need a lander.

 

[Marener]

What do you think will be the bigger delay, NASA's end or SpaceX's?

Also, the question is moot of the FAA decides to squash Musk's launch authorization due to political reasons.

SpaceX fucked up. It’s not political.

 

[martybegan]

He couldn’t even get the launch pad right.

These failures are expensive and slow. It’s one thing to tolerate repetitive failures when he’s launching a small falcon 1. It’s a different thing when he’s destroying 39 engines and destroying his launchpad every time he fails.

We don’t need a rocket. We need a lander.

The rocket will be ready for the lander.

It isn't slow when he does it. The only thing that will stop him from trying again in a few months is the FAA.

It worked for Falcon 9, why won't it work here?

 

[martybegan]

SpaceX fucked up. It’s not political.

Bullshit. For you clowns it's always political, same as for the Deep State.

 

[Marener]

The rocket will be ready for the lander.

It isn't slow when he does it. The only thing that will stop him from trying again in a few months is the FAA.

It worked for Falcon 9, why won't it work here?

We need a lander. Instead of testing a lander, we have to wait for Musk to build the largest most complicated rocket known to man.

That's slow.

 

[Marener]

Bullshit. For you clowns it's always political, same as for the Deep State.

Really? So you think Elon Musk intended to blow a hole in his pad and throw concrete debris for miles?

That wasn't what they predicted in their authorization. They fucked up.

 

[martybegan]

We need a lander. Instead of testing a lander, we have to wait for Musk to build the largest most complicated rocket known to man.

That's slow.

When does his contract say the lander has to be ready by?

 

[martybegan]

Really? So you think Elon Musk intended to blow a hole in his pad and throw concrete debris for miles?

That wasn't what they predicted in their authorization. They fucked up.

Well now he knows he needs a better pad. No one was hurt, and no other property was damaged as far as we know currently.

He has to pay for that fix, he isn't going to get a Change Order because of it.

 

[22lcidw]

NASA currently has a rocket and a capsule that can take humans to the moon. All they need is a lander.

When do you think SpaceX is going to deliver that lander?

The Federal government is stretching our return to the moon out as long as it can. They know the built in costs will not stop once we get there. There is a reason they want to put a small space station gateway around the moon. It is easier/cheaper to put astronauts in it for a short amount of time then landing on the moon. For me, I criticize NASA because I am not getting any younger and want to see them do incredible things. The costs of those things limit what they can do.

 

[Marener]

When does his contract say the lander has to be ready by?

Dunno what the contract stipulates. But your cult leader said it'll be ready very soon.

Elon Musk says SpaceX's moon lander will probably be ready before 2024, as NASA pays $300 million toward Artemis contract

SpaceX founder Elon Musk said his company's lunar lander is expected to be ready before 2024, marking the billionaire's latest upbeat prediction.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[martybegan]

Dunno what the contract stipulates. But your cult leader said it'll be ready very soon.

Elon Musk says SpaceX's moon lander will probably be ready before 2024, as NASA pays $300 million toward Artemis contract

SpaceX founder Elon Musk said his company's lunar lander is expected to be ready before 2024, marking the billionaire's latest upbeat prediction.

www.businessinsider.com

Then why are you bitching that it won't be ready on time.

Educate yourself before spewing your bullshit, poseur.

 

[Marener]

Well now he knows he needs a better pad. No one was hurt, and no other property was damaged as far as we know currently.

He has to pay for that fix, he isn't going to get a Change Order because of it.

He fucked up and the entire nearby town was covered in a layer of dust and ash. If that were part of the plan, he would have never gotten approval in the first place. Now he's going to have to build a better pad before he gets approval to launch another rocket and that's going to take a ton of time and the government is going to be more skeptical of their claims.

That's a huge problem for him.

 

[Marener]

Then why are you bitching that it won't be ready on time.

Educate yourself before spewing your bullshit, poseur.

Because it's clear to anyone with half a brain that the lander is not coming anytime soon.

Again, we need a lander, not a rocket and he's dicking around trying to get the biggest most complicated rocket ever constructed to work when we could be actually working on a realistic solution.

 

[martybegan]

He fucked up and the entire nearby town was covered in a layer of dust and ash. If that were part of the plan, he would have never gotten approval in the first place. Now he's going to have to build a better pad before he gets approval to launch another rocket and that's going to take a ton of time and the government is going to be more skeptical of their claims.

That's a huge problem for him.

You think so.......

Dust and ash. that's the worst that happened?

 

[martybegan]

Because it's clear to anyone with half a brain that the lander is not coming anytime soon.

Again, we need a lander, not a rocket and he's dicking around trying to get the biggest most complicated rocket ever constructed to work when we could be actually working on a realistic solution.

Which will save time for later, further and more complicated missions.

Starship would be part of, or the prototype to, the rockets that lead to maybe a permanent moon base, or Asteroid Missions, or maybe even Asteroid mining.

Musk thinks big, and again, he wasn't your boogeyman until he came out as a free speech advocate.