Recent comments in /f/space
YNot1989 t1_j7t71l4 wrote
Reply to SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
Its so nice having Gwynne with defacto control of the company. Now these press releases actually carry some authority.
biglumps t1_j7t6xau wrote
Reply to Question about UFO or launch by NeedleworkerFit188
Can you explain "They were making like triangles" a bit more please?
Some satellites go bright and then dim, but the ones I have seen do that are usually solitary satellites, not in groups. There are some video examples here: https://earthsky.org/space/i-saw-a-flash-in-the-night-sky-what-is-it/
[deleted] t1_j7t6897 wrote
[deleted] t1_j7t66dw wrote
Reply to Question about UFO or launch by NeedleworkerFit188
[removed]
NeedleworkerFit188 OP t1_j7t64t4 wrote
Reply to comment by sadetheruiner in Question about UFO or launch by NeedleworkerFit188
No that kind of investigation. But as it could be an aircraft that is not seen by the radar. We would have to declare for nacional security things. We were not completely sure as we were not landing in Argentina.
sadetheruiner t1_j7t5sic wrote
Reply to Question about UFO or launch by NeedleworkerFit188
Why would you be investigated? You have witnesses, unless you, your copilot and attendant all have a history of being drunk on the job. Reporting crap like that to the control tower isn’t going to end with a black bag over your head by some super secret government agency.
shalol t1_j7t5ftz wrote
Reply to comment by starskip42 in SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
I’d too hope Shotwell can make a correct guess of “the big test” happening, which is scheduled for tomorrow, the very day before it happens...
Allnamestaken69 t1_j7t23ap wrote
Reply to comment by TimeTravelingChris in SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
You can't just call anyone that enters into a argument with you an Elon Stan that is arguably more pathetic than some guy stanning for elon. We all dislike stans lel.
[deleted] t1_j7t11xw wrote
Reply to Space documentry by Kaal_Jai
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j7szx49 wrote
Anonymous-USA t1_j7szma3 wrote
Reply to comment by astromaddie in Worm-holes by Consistent-Worth-711
That’s how a black hole warps space. That takes such immense mass that it would be impossible to travel through that. A wormhole could only be traversed if space-time were more like Swiss cheese with natural holes and tunnels. And we could only (still) traverse the surface of that Swiss cheese, but we’d get to the other side very fast.
Anonymous-USA t1_j7sze28 wrote
Reply to Worm-holes by Consistent-Worth-711
Here is a good explanation with a good picture: https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/what-is-a-wormhole/amp/
Unfortunately the picture shows our 3D universe as a 2D graphic folded on itself in 3D, then projected again as a 2D picture! So it could be confusing. But the movie Interstellar shows the best graphic of how a wormhole should and would work. If it exists.
If humans were to travel through the wormhole, we wouldn’t actually leave space and travel down the middle (like shown in the movie Contact) but along the surface — always touching that paper.
TimeTravelingChris t1_j7szc2d wrote
Reply to comment by fattybunter in SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
I feel like this is different because of the scale. I really do hope it works. It's incredible. I am just tempering my expectations due to the complexity and it's weird that seems to be a hot take.
[deleted] t1_j7sywrz wrote
Reply to comment by TrailbyDesign in SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
[removed]
Adeldor t1_j7sx8y9 wrote
Reply to Space documentry by Kaal_Jai
Seeing this query often enough, I now keep a standard response :-) :
-
Moon Machines (great detailed breakdown of the Apollo program vehicles)
-
Apollo 11 (50^(th) anniversary documentary, some very high resolution film, no added commentary)
-
Mars Inside SpaceX (covers recent exploratory intention and activity, albeit not Starship)
-
Fly Rocket Fly (documentary on the sad story of OTRAG)
-
Cosmos series (with Carl Sagan). Also deeply philosophical, and despite its four decade age is little dated. Sagan had a way with words unmatched, per this little example (narration over video by Erik Wernquist).
fattybunter t1_j7sx2tl wrote
Reply to comment by TimeTravelingChris in SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
Well if you're getting ad hominem about it, people have been proselytizing the same rhetoric since 2005 for SpaceX and it's infuriating. Obviously the timeline estimates have been way off. It's the damn actions that matter.
TimeTravelingChris t1_j7svcdm wrote
Reply to comment by fattybunter in SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
I am so tired of Elon Stan's. Yeah Elon was calling for the first launch back in August to occur in "1 to 2 months" so he was off a bit. And my point is it IS the most powerful rocket of all time, we should probably expect issues and delays.
I would love for this thing to fly without issue.
fattybunter t1_j7st20x wrote
Reply to comment by slashgrin in SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
People are most definitely already designing payloads for it. Starship is very, very real in the aerospace industry where people actually understand the implications, even though the public is focused on Elon time bad
Deepthought5008 t1_j7st0ev wrote
Reply to Space documentry by Kaal_Jai
"13 minutes to the moon" BBC Podcast
Epic stories of Nasa’s missions to the Moon.
fattybunter t1_j7ssrwa wrote
Reply to comment by blingybangbang in SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
Your information is still correct. Planned launch for last November.
fattybunter t1_j7ssmot wrote
Reply to comment by TimeTravelingChris in SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
Take a step back, and think about the context here. The most powerful rocket of all time, which is also fully reusable, is about to test fire all of its engines tomorrow in a full launch configuration. You are criticizing timelines? This would have been like yelling at Ford for not making the Model T sooner.
[deleted] t1_j7sptj9 wrote
Reply to comment by immortalis88 in Worm-holes by Consistent-Worth-711
[removed]
ReadingPowerful9867 t1_j7spd1k wrote
Reply to SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
'One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions' - Werhner von Braun. So, let'er rip!
Aeromarine_eng t1_j7sozc5 wrote
Reply to Space documentry by Kaal_Jai
How the Universe Works on the Science Channel.
Reddit-runner t1_j7t73o9 wrote
Reply to comment by TimeTravelingChris in SpaceX president/COO Gwynne Shotwell says they're attempting Starship's 33-engine static fire test tomorrow, Feb 9. by spsheridan
>Elon probably needs to stop communicating unrealistic time lines.
No. Definitely not.
You really don't have to like Musk. But his aggressive timelines are one of the main reasons for SpaceX success.
It gives management a defined goal to work towards to. Without that, the pace would be much slower.