• JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is it an elon lie that SpaceX has incredibly effective cheap reusability in their rockets? That seems pretty well established at this point.

    • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      It isn’t well established, look how much NASA paid Russia for launch services, now look at SpaceX. Seriously. For pretending to be fans of this shit in general, it really is only the musk lies you people repeat.

      • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        5k/kg for Soyuz vs 2.5k/kg for SpaceX? I don’t get your point. Or are you talking about the ride swaps with Russian and US Cosmonauts and Astronauts respectively to ride in each other’s rockets to give dissimilar redundancy?

        • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ah yes, the dollars per kilo fallacy. A favorite of people that don’t understand the industry but want to repeat the things Musk tells them to. Fantastic. We’re already on page two of the script. Now, go ahead and tell me how SpaceX invented something that already existed for decades.

            • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You could start off with actual mission costs, launch support costs, and what missions need to be met. For example, this is why Star Shit is such a moronic idea when Falcon could perform all its launch needs.

              Are you about to tell me that a 747 is always cheaper than a Cessna? Is that the next argument in your script, or do we have to skip a couple pages before you bring that one out?

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

                No, I was going to say that the launch support costs and mission needs are also more capable with falcon 9 than soyuz.

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

                Starship is actually planned to be better on all those fronts than falcon 9. Cheaper per launch, less support costs, more capable and flexible system, etc. There might be some small use case where falcon 9 is still superior, but it will be pretty small if starship works.

                • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I mean, I now know how little you know. Congratulations tipping your hand here, because truly these are the words of someone that’s a fan of Musk and has zero serious thoughts about space. Jeff Bell would be beside himself reading what you’ve written. Back to the Zubrin books with you.