PebMets

@15Redstones @pham_alam @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin You mean like this: youtube.com/watch?v=1I-rGK…

@PebMet1 @pham_alam @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin If NASA was similarly open about what causes each issue and what was learned on each flight?

I know @SpaceX and @elonmusk followers will not be honest: If it were @NASA , @ulalaunch, @blueorigin developing Starship, would you still follow it? Most of you would say it is a piece of junk or what are we doing if it were anyone else but SpaceX/Musk developing it.

@WhizSquid To date, @elonmusk and @SpaceX had nothing to do with Artemis I or II. Am I missing something? Starship is still in a test/prototype phase since the program was announced in 2018. If I missed something, I apologize.

Elon actually gets shit done. Newsome, etc... just talk.

@Elevatorcait @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin Read what I wrote. I said if the others were developing Starship. No mention of New Glenn, SLS, or Vulcan. The comment is if the others were developing Starship, (not the others). After 12 flights, many "SpaceX" supporters would be criticizing the program.

I don't really know what you're trying to say with this, I closely follow New Glenn and the Artemis program and I want to see progress in space. Starship is different because there's a level of access to the public that no other program has so you can closely track everything that's happening which is why it gets talked about more. I want to see a thousand starships and a thousand Blue Moons landing on the Moon supplying a permanently occupied NASA moon base. these programs don't need to be at odds with each other

@peterrhague Re-Read what I wrote. I said if the others were developing Starship. I didn't mention New Glenn, SLS, or Vulcan. I believe if they especially @NASA were developing Starship at this pace, many @SpaceX followers would be criticizing the program.

@PebMet1 Blue Origin got praise for landing boosters first time and criticism for losing a customer payload with an upper stage failure. This seems entirely fair - SpaceX aren’t risking anybody else’s stuff on their test flights

Someone hasn’t witnessed everybody who cheers on Starship also cheering on New Glenn. Including Elon.

@LesbosQuasar @15Redstones @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin Some experts say Starship is too big especially for the Artemis program. IMO, it is @elonmusk need to have the biggest and the most of everything. Musk has the habit of sometimes removing or dehumanizing non yes people from his organizations.

@PebMet1 @15Redstones @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin This conversation went exactly where I expected it to go. You think every engineer at SpaceX is some kind of yes man? One thing is to go with the "pointier rocket", but there's a reason Starship has changed design several times and it is because the engineers control the program.

@pham_alam @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin Maybe I should have said many instead of a blanket statement, but I still believe many after 12 flights would be questing the program especially if @NASA was running it IMO.

@PebMet1 @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin Claiming to know another's mind is the height of arrogance. I'd follow Starship just the same no matter who was developing it. Same as I follow NG, Nova, Neutron, and LM9. Starship simply has a far more publicly accessible development center so there's much more to talk about.

@manticore116 @ErinIshimoticha Engine out on Starship

@PebMet1 @ErinIshimoticha The booster did have a problem The starship flight finished successfully it was a buoy when it failed

Correct! In a successful test, the rocket exploded. 🚀🔥

@15Redstones @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin I say let the real engineers at SpaceX design a heavy lift rocket not based on the fantasies of @elonmusk.

@PebMet1 @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin What NASA needs is funding that the actual rocket scientists can choose how to spend, not controlled by congressmen who really want to preserve jobs at specific contractors. SLS/Orion has already consumed $60b. That could've paid for a far more capable system.

@kmh Wait until people notice the payload capability will drop as it did for versions 1 and 2 from what was being advertised.

How many noticed that the claimed Raptor v3 thrust figures dropped dramatically?

@Blaze_R935 @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin Until Starship proves it is 100% reusable, we should not assume it will be. Many rocket programs have great ambitions, but learn many of those are difficult and/or not cost effective to achieve.

@PebMet1 @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin Yes. A fully reusable 100+ ton to orbit rocket is game-changing tech whoever builds it.

@patriottakes There has to be someone in the administration who can invoke the remedies listed in the 25th Amendment.

Unhinged Memorial Day post

@TechOperator My Camry can go the 200 miles and back, (total 400), on one tank with about another 100 miles to spare, (highway driving). Your point being?

The average American takes two to three road trips a year, most of which cover 200 to 300 miles. Most modern EVs handle that on a single charge with room to spare. An EV's range is not the problem you think, especially if it's a Tesla.

@HalcyonHypnotic That was in the beginning when launching rockets, especially with humans, was new and we were still learning. I would think after all of this time, we would not use the start of the space program as an excuse for the slow pace of Starship.

“Apollo landed on the Moon in 12 launches” What people fail to remember is that there were two development programs preceding Apollo, mercury and Gemini, with years of testing leading up to the moons landings. Let’s not also forget that astronauts died during Apollo 1, and honestly, Apollo 11-17 were fiascos, it’s literally a MIRACLE no one died on several of the last few Apollo launches. They only survived because of the skills and ingenuity of the engineers and astronauts. Apollo is not a good representation of how to get to the moon, in fact it was a mediocre one at best. The way starship is doing it is one of the best methods to do it, it just requires time.

@RpsAgainstTrump Who voted for this? What happened to the days when we had a president who was literate and attempted to bring both sides together?

The Divider in Chief

@KevinMe49077436 @thunderf00t If an external force hits the tile system on Starship, what do you think is going to happen? The orbiters were on the side of the stack which is why they were open to debris coming off the ET. Have you ever opened a history book? I give up.

@PebMet1 @thunderf00t Yes they did - they were too delicate to take an absolutely predictable impact and that killed the crew - the TPS failed. This is why SpaceX is testing and iterating the TPS on Starship you imbecile.

your friendly reminder that spacex has failed to achieve in 12 flights what the shuttle achieved in 1....45 YEARS AGO. A reusable heatshield! Yup starship uses exactly the same tiles as this thing!

@Dontmesswosint Read my comment again. I said "IF" they developed "Starship"

Diddyblud hasn’t heard of New Glenn

@KevinMe49077436 @thunderf00t Do you not understand? The TPS on the orbiters did not cause the failures. It was not tile failure. A foam piece from the ET detached and hit the wing on Columbia. Challenger was SRB, not TPS. The TPS systems on the orbiters did not fail on their own.

@PebMet1 @thunderf00t and it was absolutely foreseeable. the heat shield failed and killed the crew. This is why Musk is stressing the hell out of the heat shield now. I get that you want to keep whining like a little girl who dropped her ice cream, but the facts are simple. The heat shield failed.

@15Redstones @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin Maybe if they were properly funded they could do more.

@PebMet1 @SpaceX @elonmusk @NASA @ulalaunch @blueorigin That's the problem, NASA's ambitions are kinda meh.

@KevinMe49077436 @thunderf00t A little history. Challenger failed because the O-Rings on the SRB did not seal properly due to the cold. Columbia failed because a piece of foam broke off the ET and hit the leading edge of the wing. In both cases, the orbiters themselves did not cause the failures.

@PebMet1 @thunderf00t and it was absolutely foreseeable. the heat shield failed and killed the crew. This is why Musk is stressing the hell out of the heat shield now.