Elon Musk now owns 9.2% of twitter...update.. will soon be the sole owner as Board of Directors accepts his purchase offer

Page 289 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
22,892
12,566
136
But what?

The whole pad saga here seems like it was just based on pure stupidity and cost cutting. It's not like there haven't been hundreds of launches over the past 75 years to help guide optimal pad design...
Yea, probably one of Elon's ideas that he forced through... BUT spacex gotta keep pushing right? If Starship makes it, comes to fruition, it's a game changer. Fried frogs be damned.
 
Dec 10, 2005
23,719
6,518
136
Yea, probably one of Elon's ideas that he forced through... BUT spacex gotta keep pushing right? If Starship makes it, comes to fruition, it's a game changer. Fried frogs be damned.
You can have innovation without stupidity, while also protecting wildlife habitats.

As for "Starship being a game changer" - game changer for what?
 
  • Like
Reactions: repoman0

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
31,425
9,732
136
You can have innovation without stupidity, while also protecting wildlife habitats.

As for "Starship being a game changer" - game changer for what?
i believe the launch cost ($/kg) is dramatically reduced compared to existing vehicles. and the capacity is larger than most other space vehicles

just for reference, a quick google indicates existing launch costs are somewhere around $2000-$3000/kg (payload). starship is anticipated to cut that by a factor of 10x, down to the 100's of $/kg
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
22,892
12,566
136
You can have innovation without stupidity, while also protecting wildlife habitats.

As for "Starship being a game changer" - game changer for what?
Of course you can. Just saying that if you want to push innovation, some eggs gonna get cracked. Dont hold off license for a year to study the impact on local sandworms.
 
Dec 10, 2005
23,719
6,518
136
Of course you can. Just saying that if you want to push innovation, some eggs gonna get cracked. Dont hold off license for a year to study the impact on local sandworms.
Why don't you make up some more strawmen while you're at it?

Innovation is fine, but again, doesn't have to come at the expense of destroying the environment, especially if that environmental area was (key part here) **already identified as protected**. Innovation also doesn't mean reinvent the wheel and ignore all the past key learnings.
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
5,243
1,400
136
Why don't you make up some more strawmen while you're at it?

Innovation is fine, but again, doesn't have to come at the expense of destroying the environment, especially if that environmental area was (key part here) **already identified as protected**. Innovation also doesn't mean reinvent the wheel and ignore all the past key learnings.

Do you think when they built LC39A and LC39B and the VAB at the Cape that the environment wasn't impacted?

apmisc-KSC-64C-27.jpg
apmisc-KSC-65C-980HR.jpg
 
Dec 10, 2005
23,719
6,518
136
Do you think when they built LC39A and LC39B and the VAB at the Cape that the environment wasn't impacted?

View attachment 84969
View attachment 84972
Do you think that maybe when they built that pad on the Texas coast adjacent to an existing protected wildlife area they could have built it in a way that used existing best practices (learned over decades of rocket launches at those facilities you note), like flame trenches or water deluge systems, instead of stupidly making it a flat piece of cement that got blown to pieces at ignition?
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
5,243
1,400
136
Do you think that maybe when they built that pad on the Texas coast adjacent to an existing protected wildlife area they could have built it in a way that used existing best practices (learned over decades of rocket launches at those facilities you note), like flame trenches or water deluge systems, instead of stupidly making it a flat piece of cement that got blown to pieces at ignition?

A flame trench would have made the site larger since you can't go down and you would have to build ramps upward to the launch position which would have caused other complications like intruding more into the protected wildlife area. The launch site at Starbase isn't nearly as big as LC39A and B. It was a mistake to launch without the water deluge system(Which was already being built) but based on the data from the static fire SpaceX thought the concrete would hold-up for a launch.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
23,162
10,085
136
Do you think that maybe when they built that pad on the Texas coast adjacent to an existing protected wildlife area they could have built it in a way that used existing best practices (learned over decades of rocket launches at those facilities you note), like flame trenches or water deluge systems, instead of stupidly making it a flat piece of cement that got blown to pieces at ignition?
I was just watching something on one of the Discovery shows about the very early rocket testing site with German V2 tech. Guess what? It has a big flame trench. This was in like 1950.
Edit: it was also in the middle of an empty desert.
 
Last edited:

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
20,612
19,128
136
Are you saying NASA made a mistake in how they built LC39A and B?

No he isn't, but since you are claiming so without evidence, his point is, no matter what your excuse to protect your brohim Elon, this particular point is a stupid argument. Why should mistakes of decades ago, if that was the case, be stupidly repeated? Not so some Musk cult boys can make exxcuses for him, that is for shit sure.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
22,892
12,566
136
Yes. It was massively stupid. Especially with 20/20 hindsight vision. Most likely an Elon idea. One could entertain the idea that Elon keeps himself busy with Twitter as to not needlessly impede the current work at spacex and tesla.
Stupid or not, the end game justifies or tolerates the stupid IMO. Those rockets got to fly. Damned be the frogs.
Space or bust.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
57,867
12,002
136
Yea, probably one of Elon's ideas that he forced through... BUT spacex gotta keep pushing right? If Starship makes it, comes to fruition, it's a game changer. Fried frogs be damned.
Ahem.

giphy.gif
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,302
136
i believe the launch cost ($/kg) is dramatically reduced compared to existing vehicles. and the capacity is larger than most other space vehicles

just for reference, a quick google indicates existing launch costs are somewhere around $2000-$3000/kg (payload). starship is anticipated to cut that by a factor of 10x, down to the 100's of $/kg
I'm gonna put this expectation right up there with FSD was gonna turn Teslas into an income-generating robotaxis.
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
5,243
1,400
136
I'm gonna put this expectation right up there with FSD was gonna turn Teslas into an income-generating robotaxis.

What impact do you think if any a fully rapid reusable Launch Vehicle would have for the US Space Industry?
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
20,612
19,128
136
What impact do you think if any a fully rapid reusable Launch Vehicle would have for the US Space Industry?

What impact on discourse do you think it would have if the next ship launces without a flame trench and a bunch of Elon cultists are sitting in beach chairs underneath the launchpad? Would that be worht it for development for the US Space Industry?

shit, now that I think about it, it probably would, for society in general really.

NEVERMIND!