home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   sci.space.policy      Discussions about space policy      106,651 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 105,156 of 106,651   
   Dean Markley to JF Mezei   
   Re: SpaceX and the FAA   
   04 Feb 21 04:26:59   
   
   From: damarkley@gmail.com   
      
   On Thursday, February 4, 2021 at 3:20:57 AM UTC-5, JF Mezei wrote:   
   > On 2021-02-03 13:49, Snidely wrote:    
   >    
   > >> My own thoughts: SpaceX needs to build a proper lauch pad where they can    
   > >> test engines for more than 1 second, in particular ability to relight.    
   > >    
   > > Did you forget McGregor?   
   > Did McGregor detect that the header tanks weren't sufficiently    
   > pressurized leading to SN8?    
   >    
   > Did McGregor detect whatever caused SN9 to also fail its landing because    
   > one engine failed to run ?    
   >    
   >    
   > Did the 1 second test firings at Bica Chica detect the header tank issue    
   > that led SN8 to its downfall? Did they detect whatecer caused SN9 to fail?    
   >    
   > It might be cheaper for SpaceX to spit out glorified steel grain silos    
   > than to build a proper launch pad but if the FAA puts a stop the cowboy    
   > "build, launch, watch how it explodes" iterative design, SpaceX will    
   > need to put a bit ore design and a bit less iterative.    
   >    
   > You'll note how SpaceX stopped testing SN7.2, and in hindsight, the FAA    
   > likely blocked the destructive test. So it is starting to impact    
   > SpaceX's ability to develiop in the "wild wild west" method. (and that    
   > test is a mild one, more akin to putting some mentos in a bottle of diet    
   > pepsi).   
      
   You seem to want SpaceX to fail.  You have this technique of asking a lot of   
   questions, getting answers you don't like and then you post mild insults such   
   as "glorified grain silos"?  Perhaps you ought to study (although I suspect   
   you already know) the    
   history of government run space exploration.  In that you will find quite a   
   history of "build, launch, watch how it explodes".  I don't see how anyone can   
   deny the remarkable progree SpaceX has made.  Especially when compared to   
   cumbersome, red tape    
   inhibited government programs.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca