SpaceX Lies

May 3, 2021
9
4
15
https://www.cnet.com/news/spacex-simplified-everything-you-need-to-know-about-elon-musks-rocket-empire/#:~:text=SpaceX%2C the rocket company founded,of taking humans to Mars.
extract:
SpaceX grabbed heaps of attention in February of 2018 when it launched Falcon Heavy, the most powerful rocket launched from the US since the Saturn V that sent astronauts to the moon
This is just one of a lot of lies.

Falcon Heavy = 3.4mil lbs thrust.
Orbiter = 6.78mil lbs of thrust.

Other lies include:
1) First reusable rockets - Orbiter was reusable.
2) First reusable spacecraft - Orbiter was reusable.

Other spurious claims like "First private company to do something."

So Boeing, Northrup Grumman, Rockwell Intl?

These aren't private companies?

SpaceX took government money, too.

Also why is SpaceX building rockets that can land when ocean recovery makes more sense?

The Lunar Module could land via rocket on the Moon so nothing new there either.

And SpaceX is taking the US backward in technology going from Rp1 to Methane while China takes the lead with Hydrogen Technology.

From these basic facts. SpaceX is a dangerous, propagandistic showboat with no REAL results or accomplishments and will fail miserably to get to the Moon
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Connor
May 3, 2021
9
4
15
Wow. Never thought of SpaceX like that.
You're welcome.

I can break it down more thoroughly as people reply.

Basic take aways.

1) SpaceX has done nothing new.
2) SpaceX can't master Hydrogen so claims that bad fuels are big achievements in discovery.
3) SpaceX can't cut the cost of dV in space.
4) SpaceX can't build complex titanium alloys so claims using inferior and more massive and weaker steel is an accomplishment.

5) SpaceX has no future. Northrup Grumman launched their answer to SpaceX this year. An orbital repair drone to increase the lifespan of satellites thereby reducing demand for launching new satellites. Which is SpaceX's only business model.

6) SpaceX is a bad business model. It can never be profitable. China is 75% of satellite market and uses in house launches. SpaceX has no room to grow in a shrinking market. NASA manned launches with dragon capsule = about 1% of SpaceX debt.

Imagine trying to pay down a $100,000 dollar credit card using $1,000 a year income.

SpaceX is a disaster waiting to happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Connor
May 3, 2021
9
4
15
What company isn't when trying to promote themselves?

I suggest we stick to science and sources here. Makes for a better discussion.
I did stick to science.

I can tear apart Musks scientific claims about his rockets. Where would you like to start?

Perhaps his use of RP1 fuel?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Connor
May 3, 2021
9
4
15
Please proceed. Use sources to back up claims. Looking forward to the informed discussion.
Works better when someone asks a question about it. Am I supposed to presume your side of the argument too?

For instance why use Methane? There's no advantage for it. It has a specific impulse that is 16% less that of Hydrogen. The principle argument anyone has come up with has been methane is more storageable.

But what's that matter when the dV budget of methane cannot possibly get a meaningfully sized Payload into Martian Orbit?

So how do you want to discuss this problem? Which is one of many of SpaceX's problems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Connor
Aug 14, 2020
255
58
260
Works better when someone asks a question about it. Am I supposed to presume your side of the argument too?

For instance why use Methane? There's no advantage for it. It has a specific impulse that is 16% less that of Hydrogen. The principle argument anyone has come up with has been methane is more storageable.

But what's that matter when the dV budget of methane cannot possibly get a meaningfully sized Payload into Martian Orbit?

So how do you want to discuss this problem? Which is one of many of SpaceX's problems.
The more companies sending to space the better. I want no one or two, or even three, monolithic monstrosities monopolizing transport to space. Throughout history it took a lot of shipbuilding firms trying, and failing, to produce the lot that finally succeeded. Some of those ship, and shipping, failures were truly bizarre. The same with the aircraft industry. The same with the auto industry. You apparently want perfection up front. You want the great end product immediately up front. That would come at infinite cost and it would never leave the ground. Come to think of it, what the government has done so far for the rest of us to reach space has come at almost infinite cost and has never even left the drawing boards.

------------------------
"When the human race dies out, it will be because it was brainwashed to be so totally, completely, utterly safe that it no longer dared to keep on living, a risky business at best."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Connor
Feb 11, 2021
25
9
35
This is just one of a lot of lies.

Falcon Heavy = 3.4mil lbs thrust.
Orbiter = 6.78mil lbs of thrust.

Other lies include:
1) First reusable rockets - Orbiter was reusable.
2) First reusable spacecraft - Orbiter was reusable.

Other spurious claims like "First private company to do something."

So Boeing, Northrup Grumman, Rockwell Intl?

These aren't private companies?

SpaceX took government money, too.

Also why is SpaceX building rockets that can land when ocean recovery makes more sense?

The Lunar Module could land via rocket on the Moon so nothing new there either.

And SpaceX is taking the US backward in technology going from Rp1 to Methane while China takes the lead with Hydrogen Technology.

From these basic facts. SpaceX is a dangerous, propagandistic showboat with no REAL results or accomplishments and will fail miserably to get to the Moon
I wonder what you'll tell when SpaceX finally manages to land their Starship and take a successful flight to Mars. Will you also state that this company achieved nothing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slarty1080

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS