12-05-2023, 03:31 PM | #645 | |
extra what?
Join Date: Sep 2014
Drives: a 13 e8h frs
Location: vantucky, wa
Posts: 32,085
Thanks: 52,528
Thanked 36,809 Times in 19,084 Posts
Mentioned: 1111 Post(s)
Tagged: 9 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
I didn't use enough words. -> your summary
__________________
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Ultramaroon For This Useful Post: | Dadhawk (12-05-2023) |
12-05-2023, 04:14 PM | #646 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '23 BRZ
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 4,612
Thanks: 1,395
Thanked 3,930 Times in 2,052 Posts
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Ha, just watched this, yeah, they started with *four* additional superheavy refuelling launches, then 6, 8, 12, now they are at "upper teens". He (I think) tongue-in-cheek says he did the math and came up with 28...
Anyway, at 30 minutes in: "So the question is, is this *smart*?". No, this is *not* smart. This is f*cking stupid, and we're never going to land people on the moon again with this approach. |
The Following User Says Thank You to ZDan For This Useful Post: | Dadhawk (12-05-2023) |
12-05-2023, 07:08 PM | #647 |
The Dictater
Join Date: Apr 2017
Drives: '13 Red Scion FRS
Location: MD, USA
Posts: 9,508
Thanks: 26,347
Thanked 12,528 Times in 6,204 Posts
Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Regardless of the space stuff, I'm going to make everyone on my team watch this video. This guy gets it. It's not just NASA with these problems.
__________________
If a picture is worth a thousand words, a model is worth ten thousand pictures.
Also: "Build Thread" |
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Spuds For This Useful Post: | bcj (12-05-2023), Captain Snooze (12-05-2023), Dadhawk (12-05-2023), Ultramaroon (12-05-2023), x808drifter (12-05-2023), ZDan (12-05-2023) |
12-05-2023, 07:48 PM | #648 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '23 BRZ
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 4,612
Thanks: 1,395
Thanked 3,930 Times in 2,052 Posts
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
For real, NASA should have known better than to go down this route and he's right to call them out on it to their faces. No matter what ol' Musky promised them for price and performance, it was just a waste of time and money to proceed. The sooner they abandon this route the better.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to ZDan For This Useful Post: | Dadhawk (12-05-2023) |
12-05-2023, 08:01 PM | #649 | |
The Dictater
Join Date: Apr 2017
Drives: '13 Red Scion FRS
Location: MD, USA
Posts: 9,508
Thanks: 26,347
Thanked 12,528 Times in 6,204 Posts
Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
__________________
If a picture is worth a thousand words, a model is worth ten thousand pictures.
Also: "Build Thread" |
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Spuds For This Useful Post: | Captain Snooze (12-05-2023), ZDan (12-05-2023) |
12-05-2023, 09:06 PM | #650 | |
extra what?
Join Date: Sep 2014
Drives: a 13 e8h frs
Location: vantucky, wa
Posts: 32,085
Thanks: 52,528
Thanked 36,809 Times in 19,084 Posts
Mentioned: 1111 Post(s)
Tagged: 9 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
Sunshine is the greatest disinfectant.
__________________
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ultramaroon For This Useful Post: |
12-05-2023, 10:14 PM | #651 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Drives: Q5 + BRZ + M796
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 7,884
Thanks: 5,668
Thanked 5,806 Times in 3,300 Posts
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
Success and failure are measured in different ways. If I took a team who drag raced Stock Cars, and we made a 5 second pass on our first time in the Top Fuel series with a new car/setup, and the only reason we didn't run a low 4 second pass was because a belt snapped on the supercharger then I would call that a success. I think it is worth remembering that SpaceX has a history of crashing rockets before they perfected what they have. This year they have successfully launched 89 successful Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets. These Starship tests are the first time they are building something so massive using new Raptor engines over the Falcon's Merlin engines, so we should expect some growing pains. Lots went right with these two launches, and I think that is what these commenters are highlighting along with the things that will be changed like moving from hydraulic to electric gimbal system and reinforcing the launch pad. I mean, having a launchpad failure is a failure, but it is like the racetrack having oil down the lane; you can't fail the design of a Top Fuel car for a track failure like you can't fail the Starship. The hot-staging was a success too. Technically, the booster not being recovered after the second stage was a failure, but a success from any other time in history when boosters weren't recovered. In short, SpaceX is on the right path, and that is a success.
__________________
My Build | K24 Turbo Swap | *K24T BRZ SOLD*
|
|
12-05-2023, 10:27 PM | #652 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Drives: Q5 + BRZ + M796
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 7,884
Thanks: 5,668
Thanked 5,806 Times in 3,300 Posts
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
__________________
My Build | K24 Turbo Swap | *K24T BRZ SOLD*
|
|
12-06-2023, 06:17 AM | #653 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '23 BRZ
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 4,612
Thanks: 1,395
Thanked 3,930 Times in 2,052 Posts
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
The point is that even if this abomination performs *perfectly* every single time, it's going to take on the order of 15-20 launches of this rocket that is 2x a Saturn V just for *ONE* lunar landing. How does that make any kind of sense?
Also, while there is a place for just building and failing and rebuilding and refailing until you get it right, the scale of a project do deliver humans to the moon is too big for that. IMO NASA's approach here is better. Engineer, design, reengineer, redesign, some big delays but then you go to the moon on the first try. |
The Following User Says Thank You to ZDan For This Useful Post: | Dadhawk (12-06-2023) |
12-06-2023, 07:46 AM | #654 | ||
LMGTFY
Join Date: Mar 2016
Drives: 13 FRS, 91 Miata
Location: Lava Town, HI
Posts: 2,776
Thanks: 5,561
Thanked 3,647 Times in 1,625 Posts
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
Quote:
Then another 3 to land there. And if were gonna start comparing what is obviously a test phase for something planed to get us to Mars since the moon is small potatoes to the God Elon (sarcasm). May as well throw in all the failures of the Saturn program flights before Apollo. It took NASA 17 flights to even put people up on the Saturn for Apollo 7. People like to forget that NACA/NASA had just as many failures along the way. |
||
The Following User Says Thank You to x808drifter For This Useful Post: | Irace86.2.0 (12-06-2023) |
12-06-2023, 07:55 AM | #655 | |
1st86 Driver!
Join Date: Feb 2012
Drives: '13 FR-S (#3 of 1st 86)
Location: Powder Springs, GA
Posts: 19,887
Thanks: 39,032
Thanked 25,091 Times in 11,446 Posts
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 4 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
My main point was, and remains, that calling a launch that ultimately does not meet it's end goal a resounding success is a disingenuous at best and they aren't fooling anyone. Call it what it is, a failed mission where you gathered good information to move forward to the next attempt. Ultimately its just my opinion. Oh and by the way, this is taxpayer money, or at least is partially funded by taxpayer money. SpaceX has received contracts from NASA worth at least $13B.
__________________
Olivia 05/03/2012 - 01/06/2024. 231,146 glorious miles.
Visit my Owner's Journal where I wax philosophic on all things FR-S Post your 86 or see others in front of a(n) (in)famous landmark. What fits in your 86? Show us the "Junk In Your Trunk". |
|
12-06-2023, 07:56 AM | #656 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '23 BRZ
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 4,612
Thanks: 1,395
Thanked 3,930 Times in 2,052 Posts
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
The first time they *tried* to go to the moon, they went there, both with Apollo 8 (manned) and Artemis I (man-rated, but unmanned).
The first time they *tried* to land humans on the moon (Apollo 11), they did. Starship is about the least efficient way of getting boots on the moon imaginable. It's like the Cybertruck of spacecraft. |
12-06-2023, 08:12 AM | #657 |
1st86 Driver!
Join Date: Feb 2012
Drives: '13 FR-S (#3 of 1st 86)
Location: Powder Springs, GA
Posts: 19,887
Thanks: 39,032
Thanked 25,091 Times in 11,446 Posts
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 4 Thread(s)
|
Frankly it almost looks like it is designed to maximize launches rather than landings. Modern Astronaut Conspiracy theorists might say it is to increase revenue. 😎
__________________
Olivia 05/03/2012 - 01/06/2024. 231,146 glorious miles.
Visit my Owner's Journal where I wax philosophic on all things FR-S Post your 86 or see others in front of a(n) (in)famous landmark. What fits in your 86? Show us the "Junk In Your Trunk". |
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dadhawk For This Useful Post: |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Which Space Saver will fit? | Andrew666 | AUSTRALIA | 25 | 06-18-2020 09:07 AM |
Cockpit Space | Chad86 | Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum | 7 | 03-15-2014 03:24 PM |
First run 86's (Space Saver question) | DriftEightSix | AUSTRALIA | 11 | 01-10-2013 07:25 AM |
FR-S space saver | sierra | Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum | 2 | 11-29-2012 12:18 AM |
Trunk space? | tranzformer | Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum | 34 | 04-13-2011 12:29 PM |