patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,356,140 comments by 15,732 users - HANrongli, Nebulosious online now
Comments 1 - 9 of 9 Search these comments
1
Ceffer
2023 Apr 21, 12:51pm
Ceffer
2023 Apr 21, 12:51pm
It was obviously a success. It hit five UFOs, ten Chinese balloons, and a chemtrail jet before it blew up.
2
fdhfoiehfeoi
2023 Apr 22, 8:33am
fdhfoiehfeoi
2023 Apr 22, 8:33am
I remember the same horseshit being peddled the last time they had a failed launch like seven years ago. Some people live surrounded by so many lies, denial becomes second nature to them.
3
WookieMan
2023 Apr 22, 10:33am
WookieMan
2023 Apr 22, 10:33am
NuttBoxer says
It was a test. It 100% didn't succeed. A positive test makes it to orbit and they don't blow it up. Being able to release a fuel tank shouldn't be an engineering difficulty. Everyone keeps saying at least it didn't blow up the launch pad. Like that was a fucking possibility???
It's a shit ton of government money for what? To be happy they couldn't unhinge a booster stage rocket that they've done with smaller ones? It's easily scalable. They've already done it with maned missions. Scale it up.
Like I said though, what's the end goal? 99.9999999999999% of people will never travel in space. This is Musk using tax dollars to get to space minerals. Has nothing to do with colonizing Mars or some other stupid shit. He wants to find shit that makes him a multiple time trilionaire if not more. There's physical impossibilities and mental ones with living in a bubble for 1-3 years. The outcome is shit. Just state the damn mission statement, but Musk never will. He wants first dibs. This is a gold rush that most just don't know about. Not gold specifically, figuratively.
I remember the same horseshit being peddled the last time they had a failed launch like seven years ago. Some people live surrounded by so many lies, denial becomes second nature to them.
It was a test. It 100% didn't succeed. A positive test makes it to orbit and they don't blow it up. Being able to release a fuel tank shouldn't be an engineering difficulty. Everyone keeps saying at least it didn't blow up the launch pad. Like that was a fucking possibility???
It's a shit ton of government money for what? To be happy they couldn't unhinge a booster stage rocket that they've done with smaller ones? It's easily scalable. They've already done it with maned missions. Scale it up.
Like I said though, what's the end goal? 99.9999999999999% of people will never travel in space. This is Musk using tax dollars to get to space minerals. Has nothing to do with colonizing Mars or some other stupid shit. He wants to find shit that makes him a multiple time trilionaire if not more. There's physical impossibilities and mental ones with living in a bubble for 1-3 years. The outcome is shit. Just state the damn mission statement, but Musk never will. He wants first dibs. This is a gold rush that most just don't know about. Not gold specifically, figuratively.
4
TheAntiPanicanLearingCenter
2023 Apr 22, 12:31pm
TheAntiPanicanLearingCenter
2023 Apr 22, 12:31pm
WookieMan says
It was a success, and a stunning one.
The "Musk-Stein! Musk-Stein!" two minutes hate Media Gatekeepers crow.
The standards for the test were set by Musk weeks before launch: Get off the launchpad without blowing up.
Not only did it get off the Launchpad, the entire first stage worked well for several minutes and to 25 miles until the stage failed to seperate. As a REUSEABLE rocket, the heavy booster's seperation process by nature is more complicated.
Not only is it reuseable, but it's the heaviest rocket ever made, heavier than the Saturn V. The closest equivalent in size and thrust was the Soviet N1, which caused the largest non-nuclear explosion in the world, and after many tests, never got to the altitude and performance of the Starship stack did on it's very first attempt.
On a scale of 1-10, with 5 achieving the minimum qualifications and 10 being the flawless perfect first shot of getting into orbit stretch goal, this was a "7" or "8". Or "Beyond Expectations" Not bad for a First test of the Complete System.
It was a test. It 100% didn't succeed. A positive test makes it to orbit and they don't blow it up. Being able to release a fuel tank shouldn't be an engineering difficulty. Everyone keeps saying at least it didn't blow up the launch pad. Like that was a fucking possibility???
It was a success, and a stunning one.
The "Musk-Stein! Musk-Stein!" two minutes hate Media Gatekeepers crow.
The standards for the test were set by Musk weeks before launch: Get off the launchpad without blowing up.
Not only did it get off the Launchpad, the entire first stage worked well for several minutes and to 25 miles until the stage failed to seperate. As a REUSEABLE rocket, the heavy booster's seperation process by nature is more complicated.
Not only is it reuseable, but it's the heaviest rocket ever made, heavier than the Saturn V. The closest equivalent in size and thrust was the Soviet N1, which caused the largest non-nuclear explosion in the world, and after many tests, never got to the altitude and performance of the Starship stack did on it's very first attempt.
On a scale of 1-10, with 5 achieving the minimum qualifications and 10 being the flawless perfect first shot of getting into orbit stretch goal, this was a "7" or "8". Or "Beyond Expectations" Not bad for a First test of the Complete System.
5
Ceffer
2023 Apr 22, 12:35pm
Ceffer
2023 Apr 22, 12:35pm
Musk's von Braun and V2 heritage showed up, because the rocket was headed for London before they blew it up.
6
TheAntiPanicanLearingCenter
2023 Apr 22, 12:35pm
TheAntiPanicanLearingCenter
2023 Apr 22, 12:35pm
Since the 70s, we abandoned space to dole out Hofare in the name of "Making People happier on Earth, not wasting out time with moon shots"
We got an explosion in drug use, single ho moms, entitled talentless permateens, and Wokeness.
We made the wrong decision.
We got an explosion in drug use, single ho moms, entitled talentless permateens, and Wokeness.
We made the wrong decision.
7
WookieMan
2023 Apr 22, 1:17pm
WookieMan
2023 Apr 22, 1:17pm
AmericanKulak says
I disagree. SpaceX has launched more rockets than almost all countries combined over that last few years. It's scalable. The detach mechanisms should be trivial at this point. We have automated trunks on every car on the planet at this point. I get the forces are greater on a larger rocket. But it seems like simple engineering.
In the end what does it get us anyway? Go to the moon? Who gives a shit? Mars? Again, who gives a shit? All for communications and satellites but that's about any of this is good for and they've been doing it. There's no end goal with a bigger rocket. If you don't have $100B you're not in the club this effects or an astronaut. You just get to pay for it.
Basically unless you're paid by SpaceX or NASA this will literally do nothing for you. Ever. We landed on the moon. What did that get YOU or anyone on this site or the vast majority of the planet. Nothing. Rockets. This is a meathead muscle car guy on steroids with rockets. We learned we can blow a rocket up that doesn't get into space. We already knew how to do that.
On a scale of 1-10, with 5 achieving the minimum qualifications and 10 being the flawless perfect first shot of getting into orbit stretch goal, this was a "7" or "8". Or "Beyond Expectations" Not bad for a First test of the Complete System.
I disagree. SpaceX has launched more rockets than almost all countries combined over that last few years. It's scalable. The detach mechanisms should be trivial at this point. We have automated trunks on every car on the planet at this point. I get the forces are greater on a larger rocket. But it seems like simple engineering.
In the end what does it get us anyway? Go to the moon? Who gives a shit? Mars? Again, who gives a shit? All for communications and satellites but that's about any of this is good for and they've been doing it. There's no end goal with a bigger rocket. If you don't have $100B you're not in the club this effects or an astronaut. You just get to pay for it.
Basically unless you're paid by SpaceX or NASA this will literally do nothing for you. Ever. We landed on the moon. What did that get YOU or anyone on this site or the vast majority of the planet. Nothing. Rockets. This is a meathead muscle car guy on steroids with rockets. We learned we can blow a rocket up that doesn't get into space. We already knew how to do that.
8
TheAntiPanicanLearingCenter
2023 May 13, 10:16pm
TheAntiPanicanLearingCenter
2023 May 13, 10:16pm
WookieMan says
Not at all. Thrust creates vibration that needs to be handled. The more payload, the more thrust, Mo' problems. We're going from a few engines to two dozen.
Otherwise, once we had the Juno we could have simply upscaled it and not bothered with the Saturn Series. Ditto for the R-7/Soyuz system.
You can't scale up a 20 foot Hunter into a 2000 ton Cargo Ship just by enlarging it.
It's already a stunning success; N1 a similar multi-engine rocket, never got more than a few hundred feet off the ground and was the biggest non-nuclear explosion in history.
WookieMan says
It allows private labs in space - NASA has ridiculous restrictions and expense that makes it prohibitive to any company but the very largest or Government Agencies. And then all kinds of rules about what experiments their astronauts and ISS can perform.
There's already another Private Lab company by another billionaire:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/10/world/spacex-vast-private-space-station-launch-scn/index.html
Also, it allows far more effective deployment of Starlink Satellites which already made Hughes utterly uncompetitive.
The REASON SpaceX dominates the launch field is that it cut the price per pound to launch significantly and neither the ESA/Ariane and even low-cost Soyuz can't really compete. ESA's Ariane and Ruscosmos and the Japanese, Chinese, and Indians right now are the ones running VANITY missions so they have domestic space flight programs. SpaceX costwise has replaced them all.
Without a Lunar landing or Mars mission, modern life depends on Satellites for Communication, Weather, and of course Military Intelligence. Having a huge payload rocket makes it cheaper and better. Sure, a DC-6 can get some cargo or a 50 people across the Country, but a 737 or C-5 carries more people, goes further, is more efficient, with a far larger payload.
The Orion and CST are Vanity Taxpayer Money/Job Creation sinks at this point. There's no reason a Dragon can't do everything and it's a proven design. Needs little mod as a lunar lander. Shit, the Dragon has a built in abort feature, doesn't need the solid rocket crap attached to the top, has it's own intregal engines.
I disagree. SpaceX has launched more rockets than almost all countries combined over that last few years. It's scalable. The detach mechanisms should be trivial at this point. We have automated trunks on every car on the planet at this point. I get the forces are greater on a larger rocket. But it seems like simple engineering.
Not at all. Thrust creates vibration that needs to be handled. The more payload, the more thrust, Mo' problems. We're going from a few engines to two dozen.
Otherwise, once we had the Juno we could have simply upscaled it and not bothered with the Saturn Series. Ditto for the R-7/Soyuz system.
You can't scale up a 20 foot Hunter into a 2000 ton Cargo Ship just by enlarging it.
It's already a stunning success; N1 a similar multi-engine rocket, never got more than a few hundred feet off the ground and was the biggest non-nuclear explosion in history.
WookieMan says
Basically unless you're paid by SpaceX or NASA this will literally do nothing for you.
It allows private labs in space - NASA has ridiculous restrictions and expense that makes it prohibitive to any company but the very largest or Government Agencies. And then all kinds of rules about what experiments their astronauts and ISS can perform.
There's already another Private Lab company by another billionaire:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/10/world/spacex-vast-private-space-station-launch-scn/index.html
Also, it allows far more effective deployment of Starlink Satellites which already made Hughes utterly uncompetitive.
The REASON SpaceX dominates the launch field is that it cut the price per pound to launch significantly and neither the ESA/Ariane and even low-cost Soyuz can't really compete. ESA's Ariane and Ruscosmos and the Japanese, Chinese, and Indians right now are the ones running VANITY missions so they have domestic space flight programs. SpaceX costwise has replaced them all.
Without a Lunar landing or Mars mission, modern life depends on Satellites for Communication, Weather, and of course Military Intelligence. Having a huge payload rocket makes it cheaper and better. Sure, a DC-6 can get some cargo or a 50 people across the Country, but a 737 or C-5 carries more people, goes further, is more efficient, with a far larger payload.
The Orion and CST are Vanity Taxpayer Money/Job Creation sinks at this point. There's no reason a Dragon can't do everything and it's a proven design. Needs little mod as a lunar lander. Shit, the Dragon has a built in abort feature, doesn't need the solid rocket crap attached to the top, has it's own intregal engines.
We did not have a failure this morning. The Starship has 32 engines and generates 16.9 million pounds of thrust. In comparison, the NASA SLS hit a little over 8 million pounds of thrust. It was Starship’s first test flight. There was a great fear that it would blow up on the launch pad causing massive property damage and possibly fatalities. (Those in the aerospace business call this a RUD). When the booster lifted off smoothly and climbed high in the sky, it was a great success. SpaceX will need to make some adjustments to make the next flight a full success and take it into orbit. It will be a couple of years to get it to the point of carrying humans.
Elon Musk and Russia
When Elon made his first fortune with PayPal in the 1990s, he decided to get into the space business. He went to Russia and attempted to purchase three surplus Russian ICBMs to turn them into space launch rockets for satellites and the like. The Russians did not take Elon’s offer seriously. They rejected his offer and, shall we say, laughed him out of Russia.
Elon came back from Russia offended and determined to build his own rockets. SpaceX was born. Elon, like me, has great admiration for Russian rocket engineering. He decided to take Russian rocket engineering and make it better. The Falcon 1, Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy boosters, and his Merlin and Raptor engines are based on Russian designs and better. His Dragon space capsule is far superior to the Russian Soyuz.
When Elon went to work on a super powerful booster, his inspiration was the Russian N-1 rocket. This 1960s rocket was the Soviet competitor to the Saturn 5 rocket. It was an incredible rocket that at the time was the most powerful rocket ever built on Earth (Over 10 million pounds of thrust.). If the Soviets had not quit due to internal squabbling, they would have created a super lift rocket. They would have put cosmonauts on the moon. Four launch attempts were made with the N-1 rocket. Each was a spectacular failure. One failure produced an explosion roughly equivalent to the detonation of a small tactical nuclear warhead. Up to 300 Soviet military personnel and civilians were killed in this blast. (To this day, the Russians are wary about releasing the actual death toll.) There was massive property damage.
Elon was determined to build an improved N-1 rocket that was superior to what the Soviets had created. Starship is the N-1 rocket reborn much better than the original N-1. On the first launch Thursday, it cleared the launch pad and soared into space in a way that the N-1 booster never did. Starship will be reusable and far cheaper than the N-1 was.
Starship was produced without giant government resources normally associated with the development of such a giant rocket. For example, the Apollo program that put American astronauts on the moon employed 400,000 skilled men and women. The US government spent roughly $265 billion in 1965 dollars to make this happen. With adjustments and inflation that is roughly $2.53 trillion dollars in 2023 dollars. Elon’s Starship Program which will take humans to the moon, Mars, and out to the outer planets was produced at a tiny fraction of the cost of a government program.