I would think that after watching Musk's magic touch lose over 70% of the value of Twitter and nearly half of Tesla's value (since the nearly $300/share price last year) the shareholders may be realizing the emperor has no clothes.
Twitter implosion, no self driving cars, fake Hyperloop, and guess what - he's also responsible for the US space program right now.
He's got 3 billion in US tax dollars an blows up spaceship like crazy.
His plan is to have a space base on the moon and refuel rockets in space.
It wouldn't be a bad idea for a legitimate space program. Having a refueling station on the moon makes the most sense for interplanetary travel.
Plus, SpaceX has a team who's sole purpose is keeping Musk away from things.
Oh no, there's no fueling station on the moon. The rocket is being built with such a oversized payload that it needs 15 refueling rockets to be sent up to refuel it just to get one rocket to the moon.
As opposed to the 1970s Appolo missions which took one rocket to get there and back.... Musk is using 15 to get there and back.
Destin from Smarter Everyday gave a speech at NASA about how it's kind of a crazy plan but no one is allowed to criticize it because Musk is so rich and NASA has penned a deal...
... then recently Thundef00t made a video about it that makes it clearer what Destin was saying.
I read your post and thought, "there's no way this is correct, this person has to be exaggerating the plan." I'm in the rocket and satellite business but haven't followed NASA's plans in the last decade since they have been so misguided. So I figured I'd look it up and see what the real plan was.
Holy shit, you were actually being kind. NASA estimates up to 20 launches per trip, because they don't trust SpaceX's boil-off estimates. NASA's overall plan is even wilder than the plan for just SpaceX. They have New Glenn launching one thing, Boeing's rocket launching another thing, SpaceX's new rocket launching a bunch of other stuff. All of those rendezvous before to prepare for the mission, then part of that thing goes to the moon. Then it comes back and re-rendezvous before another part separates and goes to Earth.
I'll have to check out Mr f00t
Having a refueling station on the moon makes the most sense for interplanetary travel.
My experience in KSP tells me you want extraction and a refinery on the moon, but refuelling to be done in orbit.
You just need moar boosters.
That does seem to be the plan
i guess you arent familiar with HG Wells The Time Machine where moon colonists accidently explode the moon in 2037, rendering the earth virtually uninhabitable.
whose* sole purpose is
Good catch. SwiftKey kinda decides on its own which to use.
He doesn't have a space base. Seems the idea is that somebody else builds that base and refueling while SpaceX is going to be the handsomely paid taxi driver.
My reading of NASA's plan is that SpaceX does the refueling launches (between 8 to 20 refueling launches per moon mission) while Boeing does the taxi of people. Blue Origin launches the base.
I would think that after watching Musk's magic touch lose over 70% of the value of Twitter and nearly half of Tesla's value (since the nearly $300/share price last year) the shareholders may be realizing the emperor has no clothes.
Twitter implosion, no self driving cars, fake Hyperloop, and guess what - he's also responsible for the US space program right now.
He's got 3 billion in US tax dollars an blows up spaceship like crazy.
His plan is to have a space base on the moon and refuel rockets in space.
It wouldn't be a bad idea for a legitimate space program. Having a refueling station on the moon makes the most sense for interplanetary travel.
Plus, SpaceX has a team who's sole purpose is keeping Musk away from things.
Oh no, there's no fueling station on the moon. The rocket is being built with such a oversized payload that it needs 15 refueling rockets to be sent up to refuel it just to get one rocket to the moon.
As opposed to the 1970s Appolo missions which took one rocket to get there and back.... Musk is using 15 to get there and back.
Destin from Smarter Everyday gave a speech at NASA about how it's kind of a crazy plan but no one is allowed to criticize it because Musk is so rich and NASA has penned a deal...
... then recently Thundef00t made a video about it that makes it clearer what Destin was saying.
I read your post and thought, "there's no way this is correct, this person has to be exaggerating the plan." I'm in the rocket and satellite business but haven't followed NASA's plans in the last decade since they have been so misguided. So I figured I'd look it up and see what the real plan was.
Holy shit, you were actually being kind. NASA estimates up to 20 launches per trip, because they don't trust SpaceX's boil-off estimates. NASA's overall plan is even wilder than the plan for just SpaceX. They have New Glenn launching one thing, Boeing's rocket launching another thing, SpaceX's new rocket launching a bunch of other stuff. All of those rendezvous before to prepare for the mission, then part of that thing goes to the moon. Then it comes back and re-rendezvous before another part separates and goes to Earth.
I'll have to check out Mr f00t
My experience in KSP tells me you want extraction and a refinery on the moon, but refuelling to be done in orbit.
You just need moar boosters.
That does seem to be the plan
i guess you arent familiar with HG Wells The Time Machine where moon colonists accidently explode the moon in 2037, rendering the earth virtually uninhabitable.
Good catch. SwiftKey kinda decides on its own which to use.
He doesn't have a space base. Seems the idea is that somebody else builds that base and refueling while SpaceX is going to be the handsomely paid taxi driver.
My reading of NASA's plan is that SpaceX does the refueling launches (between 8 to 20 refueling launches per moon mission) while Boeing does the taxi of people. Blue Origin launches the base.