| General > General Technical Chat |
| Starship 12.5km launch |
| << < (5/13) > >> |
| wraper:
--- Quote from: S. Petrukhin on December 12, 2020, 06:21:10 am ---Please, explain what makes SpaceX so happy? With modern tools, they try to repeat what was done many years ago with primitive tools. Yes, well done, it's good that there is work for engineers, but this is the invention of the wheel. --- End quote --- Really? Please tell me who ever landed the rocket or even simply space capsule in this way. Not to say no one besides them landed orbital class rocket yet. --- Quote ---By the way, pay attention: the rocket turns around the center due to two steering engines at the edges. For some reason, SpaseX decided to rotate one engine around the nose, which I think is unwise. --- End quote --- Starship rotates by using main rocket engines. On the nose there are only comparably weak cold gas thrusters for rapidly correcting it's position. --- Quote ---And I also have an idea that rockets don't fly backwards, that the problems started earlier, when the skin fires were visible. And then it fell with the engine turned off very hot. And the red, then the green color of the flame, I think, from the fact that something melted and burned there. --- End quote --- They do and you apparently have no clue. Their Falcon 9/heavy boosters land with engines first just fine. Read the thread instead of baking baseless claims. Engines malfunctioned due to lack of pressure in fuel tank. --- Quote ---Are modern positioning and computing tools afraid of the wind? :) --- End quote --- If it's so easy to land 15 story building falling down from space, why nobody else did this? |
| S. Petrukhin:
--- Quote from: wraper on December 12, 2020, 10:00:04 am --- --- Quote from: S. Petrukhin on December 12, 2020, 06:21:10 am ---Please, explain what makes SpaceX so happy? With modern tools, they try to repeat what was done many years ago with primitive tools. Yes, well done, it's good that there is work for engineers, but this is the invention of the wheel. --- End quote --- Really? Please tell me who ever landed the rocket or even simply space capsule in this way. Not to say no one besides them landed orbital class rocket yet. --- Quote ---By the way, pay attention: the rocket turns around the center due to two steering engines at the edges. For some reason, SpaseX decided to rotate one engine around the nose, which I think is unwise. --- End quote --- Starship rotates by using main rocket engines. On the nose there are only comparably weak cold gas thrusters for rapidly correcting it's position. --- Quote ---And I also have an idea that rockets don't fly backwards, that the problems started earlier, when the skin fires were visible. And then it fell with the engine turned off very hot. And the red, then the green color of the flame, I think, from the fact that something melted and burned there. --- End quote --- They do and you apparently have no clue. Their Falcon 9/heavy boosters land with engines first just fine. Read the thread instead of baking baseless claims. Engines malfunctioned due to lack of pressure in fuel tank. --- Quote ---Are modern positioning and computing tools afraid of the wind? :) --- End quote --- If it's so easy to land 15 story building falling down from space, why nobody else did this? --- End quote --- Can you walk backwards? Why do you usually go to the store, but don't come back from it in reverse? :) Yes, the steps are landing. What's unusual about this? Is it necessary? Is it safe? Do you think that all space companies would not be able to make such a landing and then some unique discovery? A man who just threw batteries from a store into a car? :) It's a good show, I think. I'm not saying that it's bad, on the contrary - it's better than many other things. But I don't see any admiration. Maybe I'm wrong, don't worry - just my opinion. :-// |
| S. Petrukhin:
--- Quote from: wraper on December 12, 2020, 10:00:04 am --- If it's so easy to land 15 story building falling down from space, why nobody else did this? --- End quote --- Watch the movie I suggested. :) I think you understand Russian very well. Relax and smile. :) |
| wraper:
--- Quote from: S. Petrukhin on December 12, 2020, 07:53:33 am ---But this private company is located in a country that has long mastered space. Do you think this private company doesn't have the technology and expertise? After all, NASA is very seriously involved, obviously investing a lot of money. --- End quote --- They received way less money from NASA and did a way better job than traditional space companies. And it was not a free money but money to do particular job for NASA. Starship is developed using their own money. --- Quote ---And I still can't understand why american missiles need russian engines. Where did the american ones go? --- End quote --- American missiles don't use Russian engines. Atlas V rocket does, because sometime in the past ULA decided its a good deal financially. If not US government support of their over expensive rockets, they would be bust. They barely ever launched any commercial loads. They are not competitive when Spacex is around. --- Quote ---But somehow the result reminds me Arduino... --- End quote --- Their Rockets are way more reliable than your non-arduino Proton. F9/Heavy version B5, did not have a single launch failure ever (45 launches so far). |
| BravoV:
--- Quote from: wraper on December 12, 2020, 10:00:04 am --- --- Quote from: S. Petrukhin on December 12, 2020, 06:21:10 am ---Are modern positioning and computing tools afraid of the wind? :) --- End quote --- If it's so easy to land 15 story building falling down from space, why nobody else did this? --- End quote --- I get it now, I guess we're all "mis-understood" ::) what S. Petrukhin intents to say, that Rusia is so rich, that throwing away such big rocket stage (pic below) is no big deal, probably for Rusia its like wiping nose with tissue paper and throw it away. Right ? :P |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |