The chances of gathering enough meaningful particles would be not worth the effort. However, we now know that water is notably common on other celestial bodies. So we can gather resources from there and convert the water into hydrogen and oxygen molecules.

Look up Bussard ramjets to get an idea of what might be required.

Put in more normal terms, if you marked out a random cubic meter of empty universe, there’s a 2 out of 3 chance you would have no atoms in it.

Seems like it would be a waste of energy...

[removed]

Your question will be deleted, and should be asked in the weekly questions topic.

[removed]

[removed]

What gas? It's near non-existence in the vacuum of space

Do you think they’ll make it?

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

|Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |BE-4|Blue Engine 4 methalox rocket engine, developed by Blue Origin (2018), 2400kN| |CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules| | |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)| |FAA|Federal Aviation Administration| |NSF|NasaSpaceFlight forum| | |National Science Foundation| |SLS|Space Launch System heavy-lift| |ULA|United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)|

|Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |Starliner|Boeing commercial crew capsule CST-100| |Starlink|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation| |methalox|Portmanteau: methane fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer|

^(7 acronyms in this thread; )^(the most compressed thread commented on today)^( has 16 acronyms.)
^([Thread #8532 for this sub, first seen 9th Feb 2023, 08:13]) ^[FAQ] ^([Full list]) ^[Contact] ^([Source code])

And SpaceX is far from alone is missing targets. ULA is behind on Vulcan, Blue Origin is way behind on New Glenn and BE-4, Boeing is exceedingly late on Starliner service.

It's almost like rockets are hard or something and one hiccup in hardware development puts everything back.

There was confusion once a while back. This time it moved and a lot of it is missing, presumed as used. They were 2 different events

Hello u/Consistent-Worth-711, your submission "Worm-holes" has been removed from r/space because:

• Such questions should be asked in the "All space questions" thread stickied at the top of the sub.

Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please message the r/space moderators. Thank you.

"I'm a wet bag now, let's light this candle!"

She doesn't have full control. She is the Chief Operating Officer.

Elon still is Chief Technology Officer and CEO, he owns SpaceX. At the end of the day she answers directly to Musk.

A successful static fire needs all pre burners and turbines working. A spin prime is just a test of those components. No real need to wait it out if you are confident with your engine start parameters. They’ve done the spin prime and static fire quite a few times both on vehicle and at mcgregor. Now it’s time to light the candle.

She is simply the head of the starship program. She tends to be moved into position during the transition from R&D to application. It’s not her first rodeo.

[removed]

Right, also you could see them moving. Not all of them, like one while the other were dim. Then as you said they would reappear forming a triangle

I think you're saying: each of the lights would disappear and reappear in a different position, and those positions formed a triangle.

Is that right?

Your post has been removed. For simple questions like these please use the weekly "All space question" thread pinned at the top of the subreddit.

She doesn't have full control of the company.

They were going bright and fading. Then when they appeared again they’d be in a triangle. Then one of them would go really bright then all dimmed again or fade and when they appear they were in another triangle. And so on. Sorry I can’t explain it better

[removed]

[removed]