Space and Science BS Thread

Starship and Super Heavy are going to turn the industry on it's ear, everyone else builds their rockets in clean rooms by people in bunnysuits, these are being built by a bunch of pipeline welders out in a dirt field.

 

If they prove to be successful, still a long, long way to go.

 

I'll just say this: If you had the choice between Beta-Max and VHS and one of these had a history of exploding, which one would you buy?

Similarly, if you were an astronaut, and you had the choice of launch platforms, one that has never blown up and one that has, which would you choose? Seems like an easy choice to me. Maybe that is why NASA has awarded a launch service contract to Blue Origin? NASA Awards Launch Services Contract to Blue Origin | NASA

The company I work for has supplied equipment/machinery to both Space-X and Blue Origin so I don't really have any loyalty to one or the other. I just think it's less expensive to refurbish and reuse what you have instead of having all the time and money spent building something simply evaporate when the thing you built blows up.

 

Meh, blowing shit up is part of SpaceX's process and they've been very successful with it, I can't really knock them for it. Once they figure something out, they're very good at repeating it - reality is a very good teacher.

And when they build more of them, they get better at manufacturing them. Blue Origin has been flying the same vehicle for 3 years now, while SpaceX has a fleet of boosters that they're regularly building, flying, landing and refurbishing. That is valuable experience.

Calling it a 'history of exploding' is leaving out a ton of important detail.

 

All good points. I don't have money invested in either of these companies so it's not my concern how they spend it. I don't have a problem supplying both of them with new equipment in the future if they blow that up too.

 

Because blue origin still hasn't put anything into orbit.

Their 'national team' HLS is the worst of the 3 selected for commercial lunar lander.

I mean yeah, BE-4 might go into vulcan and new glenn .. but it also hasn't flown in either yet.

Also, the Raptors in the Starship design are also methalox. And both those and the Merlins in the F9 are US made as well .. the russian engines in use are in the Atlas 5 (ULA) and Antares (Orbital Sciences/NG)

 

Um.. most liquid fuel rockets use LOX as their oxidizer.

SpaceX using krypton v. xenon in their ion propulsion is kinda neat though.

 

I will say that, sure, SpaceX had some spectacular crashes and explosions at first. But now they, basically, don't have any with the F9 boosters and will eventually get there with Starship.

I would 100% ride a F9 into orbit.

 

Kinda funny that when you go to the NLS website, the first pic you see is an F9 launching the Micheal Freilich satellite...

BO isn’t the only company holding an NLS contract.

If NASA didn’t have faith in the Crew Dragon, there wouldn’t be Crew 1 in progress with Crew 2 & 3 already planned.

I’d put money on the NASA Starliner astronauts feeling like they got the short end of the stick.

 

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2021/01/spacex-reuse-records-2020-ambitious-2021/

Ambitious goal for 2021...

 

Hey @o0oSHADOWo0o ,

Looked for a comparable article on BO, couldn’t find one...Please post if you can find!

https://www.space.com/spacex-astronaut-starship-launches-2020-milestones

 

Blue Origin is just being 'secretive' The same way they hid away all evidence of all of their crashes.

 

I never said they covered up crashes. On the contrary, I think they’re way too risk adverse to push their equipment. After all, they’re living the corporate motto...

 

You know the real reason Bezos wants to be in on launch technology, right? It's because every dollar he invests makes a significant dent in the dollars he has to pay in taxes on his Amazon earnings. Loss companies, with long term earnings potential, doing R&D have always been a way to help a tax picture. Same with Musk to some extent. It's a great industry to pour excess earnings into because the long term picture is great and the risk is low considering the tax implications.

 

Interesting. I didn’t think people like Musk or Bezos had to do anything not to pay taxes

 

Well technically they aren't doing anything lol. Their accountant does. They just waved the flag, so to speak, to cover up the sound financial decisions they're making. Honestly this sort of money is buried so far down behind holding companies it's not even funny.

 

It's the corporations that don't pay taxes. Individuals still have to duck and dodge.

 

Good read:

https://arstechnica.com/science/202...mount-of-cool-space-things-happening-in-2021/

 

I still wouldn't put money on Webb, though.

 

TFR around Boca Chica no earlier than Friday...


https://twitter.com/TGMetsFan98/status/1346538981350109185?s=20