Thread 514103758

Its great for SpaceX, but white men accomplished way more 50 years ago. The shuttle reentered the atmosphere on the first try and there was no melting metal flying off, engines exploding, or having to land in the fucking ocean. It carried 7 whites to space and back down and a payload. It is sad to see how America thinks a tin can is novel and exciting. Perhaps spacex should build a real spaceplane next.

That’s your mom’s dildo.

>>514103758 (OP)
You are fucking brown and retarded, the starships flaps are not wings. Also, the test flights are fleshing out rapid reusability, aka something the shuttle couldn't do.

>>514103758 (OP)
It also exploded a fuckton and was less reusable than Starship will be so I'm looking forward to the development.

>>514104041
starship is single use. even if it landed on dry ground it's metal would be weakened beyond repair. space shuttle worked flawless on day 1. there was no "testing thermal tiles" to see what would happen or trying to relight 1 engine. No one questioned whether ohms engine worked in space. No one questioned whether payload bay doors would open and deploy a satellite. It certainly didn't take 30 test launches. I think spacex has so many DEI chinks and jeets they are trying to copy the USA 20th century space program but have no frame of reference. would be better to go find some retired white engineers who knew how to build it or their grandchildren.

>>514104372
>starship is single use. even if it landed on dry ground it's metal would be weakened beyond repair.

The engines are built like trash as well to save on costs

>>514104041
Saaar this is rapidly reusable saaar

>>514104350
The space shuttle exploded twice in 30 years. How many times has Starship exploded?

Rapidly reusable heat shield saaar

Saaar SpaceX engineer H1b engineer steal your women

Why are some muttoids so terminally set against any progress or achievement? Bunch of swarthy half nigs and spics who have skimmed a wikipedia page and a lugenpresse hitpiece and have that same instinctive hate of the White man's progress that the full blooded coloureds do.

>>514103758 (OP)
spacex could literally put space shuttle wings, crew cabin, payload bay, airlock, space hab, robot arm, flaps, ohms, thrusters on starship and immediately get up to 1970s standards. its very telling jeets at boeing couldn't build a working thruster for starliner yet boeing built 4 space shuttles with dozens of thrusters 50 years ago. If jeetx tried to carry starship on top of a 747 today it would not leave the ground. can we just dust off space shuttle plans and try to get back to that level?

>>514104472
can someone explain this video?
please

>>514103945
She uses a bigger one. That's my anal dildo

>>514104350
>it exploded a fuck ton
>lands on the moon 6 times in a row
Yeah...

>>514104723
>Why are some muttoids so terminally set against any progress or achievement?

This is neither of those things, it's a grift.

>>514105033
>spacex could literally put space shuttle wings, crew cabin, payload bay, airlock, space hab, robot arm, flaps, ohms, thrusters on starship and immediately get up to 1970s standards.

and make it so heavy it couldn't take off, also none of it would work. yeah, they could do that.

>>514105449
part of the starship spontaneously exploded for no reason today. imagine if the space shuttle had done this on its tenth flight.

>>514103758 (OP)
Musk is going to scrap the whole starship reentry malarkey, there's no way people can be subjected to a reentry on that thing. The shuttle could skip along the top of the atmosphere and decelerate slowly, this thing seems far to big and heavy to do anything like that, the whole time it's like you're waiting for it to lose attitude control.

>>514105718
And lifted off from moon 6 times too!

>>514105829
space shuttle only had 5 engines and was not too heavy. all it's parts worked. space shuttle also had four flaps but they put them at the back like smart people with the gap across the flow instead of with the flow.

>>514104723
>be brahmin diarrheist
>scams and progress are completely indistinguishable
typical

>>514105966

The space shuttle was designed and built by competent people who were not on ketamine that we know of.

>>514103758 (OP)
that shit was empty. It landed in the ocean and theyd show you prerecorded footage from the nevada desert

>>514105286
fuckin'
SAVED
A
V
E
D

>>514105830
>imagine if the space shuttle had done this on its tenth flight.

well I don't need to imagine

>The mission, designated STS-51-L, was the 10th flight for the orbiter

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster

>>514105893
anyone on starship during "belly flop" will break their necks. space shuttle could easily be configured to belly flop, just add a small fuel tank in the cargo bay.

>>514106159
>STS-51-L
51st flight for the design. challenger disaster was because they thought they would bring liberalism into the space program. they put a woman teacher as a passenger then some leftists decided to launch in subzero temps since millions of school kids were watching the "hero" woman.

A jet with jet engines that was modified to be a flying movie studio that simulated zero-g by flying in an arc.
OP is also a homosexual.

>>514105449
A COPV exploded probably from the heat of the plasma. Ended up not being flight critical though.

>>514104372
I agree. Not everything is suited to rapid iteration atop minimally viable product. I want SpaceX to succeed, but the techbro approach of "just throw computational power at it and see what happens!" is fucking braindead. Waterfall and top-down design approaches aren't universally bad.

We need actual visionaries designing these things, not iterative server flopslop.

>>514104723
You're brown. Fucking hate how you literal animated filth demons speak English.

>>514106325
This. It failed because of woke decisions made by humans to launch it outside of operating spec.
>>514106159
Try operating something you own outside of spec and see what happens.

once more posting the superior rocket

>>514104372
Actually, they questioned and tested all of those things rigorously, it's just that most of the testing was on the ground and wasn't public, and of course, suicide burn relights of an engine like raptor wasn't a thing. And on the first launch, the payload bays did fail to close, they did see tiles fall off, and many many many tiles were dangerously shattered.
Whether Elon is allowing too many h1bs in is probably a serious issue, whether the starship should have taken more design queues from the shuttle is very possible but in defense of elon, the starship is just as valid a concept as rockets of the 60s, and even bears many incredible improvements in it's control systems and engine manufacturing techniques (I mean it ought to it has been 60 years of spaceflight)
Yeah the starship is a little radical, and a constant slew of full integration tests are probably not the best way to design something, but the shuttle had problems too and was incredibly expensive to refurbish between launches. Starship was an attempt to fix some of those issues.

>>514103758 (OP)
Everyone keeps saying "Even if you don't like Elon, SpaceX is the future of space exploration" but everything I see about it just seems like an insane money pit filled with problems that should have been solved by engineers before a prototype was even built in the first place. It's not the 60's anymore, the conditions of space and the outer atmosphere aren't unknown factors.