• ikidd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 hour ago

    I watched the recent test of catching the returning second stage booster in the chopsticks, and had a lump in my throat. Absolutely fucking amazing, nobody is in the same league as that crew.

  • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Out of curiosity - how many megatons of carbon has that produced, and how many billionaires will all the starships carry when they’ve exploited the earth’s resources and left all it’s living creatures to die and escape to mars?

  • WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    SpaceX launched about 429,125 kg of spacecraft upmass in Q1, followed by CASC with about 29,426 kg

    Smaller satellites (<1,200 kg) represented 96% of spacecraft launched in Q1, 76% of total upmass

    So the way I’m personally reading this is 2/3 of this is starlink launches

        • sleep_deprived@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          7 hours ago

          If we stop doing business with SpaceX, we immediately demolish most of our capability to reach space, including the ISS until Starliner quits failing. Perhaps instead of trying to treat this as a matter of the free market we should recognize it as what it is - a matter of supreme economic and military importance - and force the Nazi fucker out.

            • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              6 hours ago

              People really under estimate how important he is to SpaceX.

              Reusing f9 1st stage - His initiative

              Landing f9 on a barge - His initiative.

              Making Starship Stainless Steel - His initiative

              Catching Starship booster on chopsticks - His initiative.

              The list goes on and on.

              Without someone like him pushing for these radical things that everyone else thinks is impossible or a bad idea we wouldn’t recognize what SpaceX would be.

              Instead we have things like starliner which is a disaster, and blue origin which started before SpaceX and has never reached orbit.

              SpaceX would slowly transform back into ‘old space’ if he was forced out as there are very few people willing to take the risks he takes.

              Edit: and it’s even very possible that the wrong CEO takes SpaceX public too soon which would make all the risk taking and fail fast development cycle they use impossible. Think of the stock crashing when a test flight fails and the pressure from investors around that.

                • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 hours ago

                  Reusing f9, landing F9 on barge, and Stainless steel were his initiatives. The SS one was a particularly hard win for him with a lot of internal push back.

                  Catching Starship on the chopsticks might have been an idea he heard outside of SpaceX, but that he then championed, again to a lot of internal push back, I’m not 100% about it being an external to spacex idea though.

                  Edit clarity and below

                  Those are just examples though. And I’m sure there are times as you suggest that people suggest a difficult idea that he then champions as well.

                  That he can champion these radical things, his idea or not, is still the key point of his leadership that will be lost.

                  For example, someone must have suggested they use a full-flow staged combustion fuel cycle for raptor. He had to sign off on that. No one had ever designed and flown a engine like this before. The russians came closest making one, but never flew it. The predecessor to this engine in the 60s or whenever, NASA didn’t even think it was physically possible to make until the Russians made it.

        • Zoot@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Thankfully SpaceX is MORE than just Elon. Unlike Twitter, where he’s removed everyone and turned it to slop. He makes no money from it, so why shouldn’t he fuck with it?

          SpaceX actually makes money. Elon won’t fuck it up. (Or he will, but atleast we will have learned an insane amount of things thanks to them.)

          • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            I’m sure it makes money and he may not F it up, but that’s not the point. The point is that Elon has turned into the douche of the century along with his butt-buddy Trump.

            • Zoot@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              7 hours ago

              I’m all for giving Nasa the light of day again, but from what I can tell, “Its not in the American interests” to give Nasa a good budget.

              Yeah yeah yeah they overspend, are bad at budgeting, and have issues. But im quite stubborn, space science and research is priceless in my book.

              So, if SpaceX is owned by a shit bag narcissist, but atleast space research is advancing? Well, that’s fine with me. I feel very happy for all the jobs and scientists and aerospace engineers who have a job thanks to SpaceX.

              • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                edit-2
                6 hours ago

                Serious question - is it nasa over spending, or is it congress forcing certain requirements on them making things more complicated that leads to over spending?

                • Zoot@reddthat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  I am by no means a good source. From what I’ve read and seen it definitely seems like that is part of the issue. I believe for a time Nasa was also hugely underselling the real cost (likely so they could get it pushed through in the first place) which also lead to issues of its own.

        • TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Do you like modern tech? Do you like the chips in your device you’re using to comment right now? You can thank the space industry. Without Apollo we would still be 30 years behind in integrated circuit technology.

          • mojo_raisin@lemmy.bestiver.se
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            9 hours ago

            If I was given the choice by a genie, on the one side you have your laptop, Lemmy, car, etc, but millions of people an animals suffer, or on the other hand, our tech evolves more slowly and sustainably, I’d choose the latter every time.

            I’ll take being 30 years behind and still have <insert any species we’ve driven extinct>. An entitlement to the lives and well being of others for the sake of “progress” is pretty sick.

              • mojo_raisin@lemmy.bestiver.se
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 hours ago

                Pointless reply, not all suffering has the same cause of course, but most of the unnecessary suffering (i.e. that suffering of all sentient beings on top that which occurs due to the nature of life itself) is caused by human activity, specifically where selfish individuals have felt entitled to cause suffering in others, destroy ecosystems, extinct species, and oppress peoples in pursuit of their goals.

                The world is not ours to consume.

                • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 hours ago

                  But a very small portion of human activity is developing chips or launching rockets. Most of it is manufacturing disposable junk or building roads/buildings.

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      I’ll definitely boycott SpaceX now (puts “activist” in bio)

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 hours ago

      People pay good money for that ‘junk’. A quality internet connection basically anywhere in the world, including at sea and in very remote areas, is far from junk.

      • InputZero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Yeah I’m going to agree with you on this one. It blows my mind that as a species we have changed the night sky. When I was a child seeing a satellite dart across the sky was exciting because it was as rare as a shooting star. Now I look up and see a satellite every few minutes. That said, there have been a few times recently that Star Link was the only method of communication I’ve had in remote areas. It has been very helpful. I think as poorly of Musk as much as the next person but I can at least recognize the ingenuity SpaceX and Star Link.

        • NebLem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Really Starlink should be absorbed into and ran by the UN. We only have so much LEO to use, one company is bound to become a monopoly and LEO is the world’s not any nation’s property.

          • 0x0@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 hours ago

            The UN has no teeth by design and there’s a lot of money to be made privately, what makes you think it would happen?

          • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Fuck the UN.

            Seriously - when you choose a country with vile fundamental human rights abuses as the head of the human rights commission…

  • AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    With ISRO coming on strong, and Russia alienating most of the world, I’m fascinated by what this could turn into in the next couple years

    • atocci@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      Big respect to ISRO, but you read France’s Arianespace backwards. They were more of an X/5 situation.

      • Siegfried@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        You are right… my head was looking for positive changes for some reason. What happened with france?

        • atocci@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          9 hours ago

          Their primary launcher, the Ariane 5, was scheduled to be retired and replaced with the Ariane 6, but there were delays in the project. It left them with an awkward transition phase where no new Ariane 5s were being built, but Ariane 6 wasn’t ready yet, so all they could do was launch the last of the 5s.