yea man i feel u. i do take offenses too but idc much. whats annoying its that it gets distracting and sometimes the reply isn’t worth an answer and i just like to move on

They’re not “powered” by fresh water

tbh i am not responsible for what u did understand. ur mind, ur rules. i hate to repeat myself but what i meant is that using fresh water to fill the locks passively using gravity albeit it is tempting it is in fact a waste of fresh water. so saving fresh water must be a priority and instead we could actively fill the locks using sea water, but at an energy cost, yet it is durable since energy is abundant (especially clean forms of thereof). tbh i am waiting on the day when i can mute notifications of replies to my comments, such a distraction really…

how about (ol’reliable.jpeg) megapacks? with enough storage and solar capacity to cover surge consumption ?

very reliable cloud

why can’t the US solve navigation issues in the Mississippi when there’s a massive drought? And then blaming them poor people in Mississippi

that is a federal problem for which the federal government is responsable. Likewise, i was accusing the government of Panama, not its people

like all old century inventions, the thing isn’t sustainable since fresh water is finite, and the next thing close to regenerating those fresh reserves is energy-hungry desalination. might as well adress the problem head-on and power the canal with a power plant to actively fill the locks with sea water…but since its run by a third world country, i doubt they would do anything about it and instead act complacent and let things run their course

companies want the best of both worlds: they want subsidies from society, and instead of paying it back by creating employement with reasonable living wages, they cheat the system by hiring migrants…a society can’t stay functional that way in the long term

lets see how this would pan out. also europeans didn’t make their ariane rockets as profitable as spacex did, and never achieved booster vertical landing. Spacex has a record of delivering on their promises, so they kinda should be taken seriously.

they aren’t creating any value: oil will be irrelevant because it got so much weaponized that it incentivized spending for renewables. Oil rich middle eastern countries invest in laughable assets like F1 teams and airlines, anything that would promote oil use. Airlines will ultimatly go instinct once SpaceX starts shuttling people across the globe in less than one hour, instead of what used to be 12 hour flights (less than 8 hour flights shouldn’t be feasable by Starship, or aren’t economically viable). Such countries have alot of money and just keep investing in trends.

If the “chopstick” landing doesn’t work out, the design could fall back to landing legs

does that imply that the latter method costs more fuel ? if by chopstick u mean the way Starship lands in the animation video, grabbed by the crane, to be mated with the already fueled first stage ? cause that looks like straight sci-fi :D man landing legs are already awesome

Once Starship’s up and running basically everything flying today will be hopelessly obsolete

exactly, no more price gauging,penny-pinching (like Ryannair that uses reverse thrusters at landing to save brakepads lol), weight limiting (airlines would board an obese person while prohibiting another from boarding with weight limit exceeding bagage) and maltreatring airlines like Delta. Tbh Elon needs to have a dedicated airline service, powered by Starlink wifi, at least he’s worthy of gov subsidies and he’s among the few who in fact did save the taxpayer a lot of money

this thread got too specific, haha! it reminisces me of the days when i used to read spacenews.com all the time, but i had to limit my internet’s usage and cut on SLS delay news. If the launch cost gets low enough spaceX could spin a telescope manufacturing subsidiary and launch telescopes beyond earth atmosphere and charge per hour subscriptions where u could point out the telescope where u want, that way it could finally silence the telescope amateur community that keeps complaining about how bad Starlink is at ruining their space observation, but again, just daydreaming.

interesting! so 150/22=6.8 ; 67/1=67 ; 67*6.8=455.6 . i know this is stupid math but Starship is apparently expected to reduce the cost of launch to LEO by a factor of 455! thats really high for expectations to be set. Yea, heavier Starlinks would reduce this factor maybe to 400 or something, but nonetheless, the weight changes shouldn’t affect the launch costs much at this point

Yea, Starliner is miserable. Also Northrop Gruman which is a taxpayer-money sinkhole. Meanwhile their argument would be: hurr durr we are creating jubs! 1000 jobs costing the rest of 300 million people a fortune

so i assume, that if they deorbit, then it is because they run out of fuel ?

look up someone who could write a userscript that would satisfy ur need. As u are aware, such feature already exists On third party clients

Not a musk simp, but Musk corps are actually fullfilling contracts and dont have much cost overruns ( unlike other inefficient corps like Blue Origin, Lockhead Martin, and car manufacturers like Chevy and Ford that feed on gov grants and tax incentives )

i thought why didn’t they just use Falcon Heavy (64 of payload to LEO) but it seems to be too risky and costly (99million$ per launch?, cost in house probably (factual number) 60 million? ). On the other hand, a Falcon 9 (22 tons to LEO, would cost 35 million $ in house (factual) ), but launching and spreading the payload among 3 separate F9’s is less risky and costly than launching aboard the FH, i wonder how much Starship would save on launches

also solar storms can’t be good for business… i guess it wouldn’t be economically viable to also add orbit maintaining thrusters…might as well just keep launching sat batches to maintain the network shells

blocking op it is

thank you for ur outstanding work :)

probably