libs0n @libs0n

Joined April 2014

Tweets

266
Followers

8
Following

116
Likes

2K

libs0n @libs0n

2 months ago

@asdf6atz7 @Noname117S @TechGeekATX @Truthful_ast 3. 700m a year wouldn’t buy one space shuttle at all: zero cargo; NASA gets an appropriate cargo solution at that level with Dragon.

1 0 2 53 0

View Details

@asdf6atz7 @Noname117S @TechGeekATX @Truthful_ast 2. If the Space Shuttle was servicing the same CRS cargo amounts and delivery as Dragon its costs would be higher. NASA wants a lower program costs, which Dragon meets, not some bulk cost efficiency. If it were buying bulk costs would be different.

2 0 1 60 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

2 months ago

@michaelsrockets 3. He could just say empty BS rhetoric and not have any expectations of living up to it: he was gone a few years later anyways.

0 0 0 38 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

2 months ago

@michaelsrockets 2. What he didn't realize: Starship is more or less a Mars architecture unto itself. SLS is only one component in a notional Mars architecture using it that needs all the other unrealized components, components that wouldn’t exist and that SLS’ existence obstructed from occurring

1 0 0 46 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

7 months ago

@deltaIV9250 Ares 5(also at only 50m spent or so) and Altair had later timeline real starts.

0 0 0 108 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

7 months ago

@deltaIV9250 Constellation was Ares 1 and Orion only at 5-10% completion and a bunch of lying marketing dates. Something like 50 million was spent on Altair at the time, a project that would be realistically 20 billion and wouldn't land until the post mid 2030s, worse than HLS.

1 0 0 1K 1

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

7 months ago

@C_S_Skeptic @Lori_Garver Wrong. Constellation also relied on the Russians after Shuttle retirement till Orion flight. Obama started the Commercial Crew Program when he cancelled Constellation. Orion doesn't fly crewed until 2026; Dragon 2 flew in 2020, nearly 6 years before Orion did. Improved ISS gap

0 0 0 61 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

9 months ago

@offroadranger6 @ThePrimalDino 568 million is the continuing yearly program expenditure for ground systems for SLS, which, at a "once a year" flight rate is the bill for one launch alone. SLS flight rate is abysmal though; 12 billion dollars have been expended in the 3 years since last flight, so A2 is 12 bil.

0 0 1 68 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

11 months ago

@SciGuySpace Surface assets. If Starship is landing bulk ships on Mars then the materials loaded on them can be cheap near off the shelf goods, and later technicians. ie storage tanks, food, machinery, solar panels, etc.

0 0 0 122 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

a year ago

@deltaIV9250 Those are Blue Origin propaganda placeholder dates, Blue Moon M2 is more like a 2035 lander.

0 0 0 58 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

a year ago

@PantslessMadman Actual flight result is less relevant than delivering Starlink deploying MVP for when high tempo Pad2 is operational, ie next block. Same story as past flights: these are mostly irrelevant production pathfinding lagging indicators and the program marches forward. Booster reused.

1 0 1 216 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

6 years ago

@ThePrimalDino @rdstrick777 @Lori_Garver @MihirNeal @POTUS44 Actually yes, because the next administration's lunar goals could form in a better environment for it with more affordable launch options available to pursue it and the preceding technical and programmatic investments offering lunar applications as well.

0 0 0 0 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

6 years ago

@wingod @Lori_Garver Misleading headline: written by editor not her. Her plan ends SLS/O; NASA would be customer of commercial firms for exploration work. Since this is a much more productive path there is more meaningful lunar development under her plan than an ostensible "moon" labelled SLS program

0 0 2 0 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

7 years ago

@newpylonggg @ThePrimalDino @keeper_of_inns @torybruno SpaceX is refining the design and production process of Starship in lockstep and then will wrap a factory around that production process. They already have a land parcel in L.A. presumably for that.

0 0 0 0 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

7 years ago

@torybruno Gateway could easily be designed within the capability of rockets existing like the Falcon Heavy, and alternate crew supply methods pursued.

0 0 0 0 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

7 years ago

@newpylonggg @keeper_of_inns @ThePrimalDino @torybruno Starship and Super Heavy have a similar design base, so Starship is basically a leading test article for Super Heavy development. Plus Super Heavy is notionally simple, a scaled up booster stage which SpaceX well knows how to do with their Falcon 9 experience.

0 0 0 0 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

7 years ago

@JeffGreason @torybruno The future will have: copious methane injection stages(Starships) and copious flights of low cost methane filling fuel(Starship tanker launches), and this will be lower cost and greater availability than hydrogen injection stages and off world fuel sources.

0 0 0 0 0

View Details

libs0n @libs0n

7 years ago

@george_sowers @QuantumG @TheLurioReport Their tech program wiped out by SLS/O. So too: robotic missions, including an ISRU seeking moon rover one. Not as anti-Moon as smears said. SDHLV moon plans bad for Mars: passed over for better focused program. Next pres could add moon back in and find better environment for it.