I can't believe I've never been on this chat before. Can I just hang out here with fellow space nerds? Or do I need to provide only constructive comments somehow? Thanks
They are going to slow down until they get Block 5 into the fleet and qualified for quick reuse. If 1046 (first flight) is still being examined, then 1047 which is Telestar 18 or 19 in July, may not be reused until those results are in. And they need a B5 at Vandenberg. And they are only making about 10-12 a year at this rate.
So getting started back up on Block 5 is going to slow them down. The hope seems to be they can speed back up once they get a few in the fleet and reflying.
I recently edited this question and made some minor spelling corrections and tidying. However, the end of the question had this:
Im thinking it would be a minuscule % but Im not sure. It could be a lot or a little but the idea is still sexy to me. Thank you guys.
Now, aside from giving me ...
SpaceX in some ways is a very open company, in other ways is a very private company. Only those in the know are aware that the latter is actually often the case.
So long as they can get 3 or 4 cores out before July and start reflying them, even 1-2 months apart, that is probably enough to keep up with the manifest.
When I worked with a mission going on a SpaceX rocket people were frustrated that SpaceX provided to little data to its customers, which apparently is against the convention in the industry.
People on Reddit /r/spacexlounge really don't like to hear anything remotely critical of SpaceX
I am ok with critique. I am just hopeful for the future. But not blind. There are some key tests coming up for Block 5 that are super critical. Many things hinge on them. Here is hoping they go well.
Evidence of success landing, learned experience from Block 3 and 4 suggest that B5 should not be that big a deal, but who knows.
Question if SpaceX has a plan if the switch to Block 5 doesn't work as expected? Question the cost for the first ticket to Mars? They seem to downvote such things.
There are two sets of numbers for 2019. The customer launches, and the number of launches that SpaceX claims they will launch. They are two very different numbers.
I can't remember, but I have heard something semi-official somewhere that indicated more launches planned for Falcon then the 18 or so Gwynne indicated.
@called2voyage it sometimes takes me additional seconds to get a clear picture of the issue. Was there some emergency about me being momentarily confused about the distinction between "space-based laser" and "space laser?" You locked the question just as I was doing the second roll-back.
Also, it would have been a lot easier if you just explained the nature of the problem, I could think of several different reasons why you were noting those facts, and did not know which one was your reason.
Who is the artist of this image appearing in an article about a Russian space laser?
This question was previously titled (and worded internally) as being about a "space-based" laser. The laser is not planned to be space-based (which would mean the laser is in space) and the article never claimed...
@uhoh You didn't do anything wrong. I was just following standard procedure for a rollback war. You and I tried to rollback at the same time, so it got auto-flagged.
So, we have another useless question getting into the 'hot network questions' pool and attracting huge numbers of views. On one hand, it's nice that people see Space.SE, on the other hand, does it always have to be the conspiracy-nutter questions that attract the attention?
there are some alternate endings to the MER strip: https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/6or057/xkcd_695_apparently_cern_scientists_couldnt/ https://imgur.com/VbKV9DF and https://i.imgur.com/VZvj5S7.jpg