SpaceX shows off Super Heavy boosters 'for the next 3' Starship flights (photos)

[Admin]

SpaceX just shared photos of the "megabay" at its Stabase site in South Texas, which is jam-packed with Starship Super Heavy boosters.

SpaceX shows off Super Heavy boosters 'for the next 3' Starship flights (photos) : Read more

 

[George²]

Which one is for Starship v2?

 

[orsobubu]

no way they will launch men on the moon in 2026, i also doubt they landed at all in 1969... in two years, after the apollo 1 disaster, they redesigned entirely the spacecraft and landed (highly suspicious speed), and now they are supposed to go again in two years, but: they succesfully launched the rocket 20 times before apollo 11, today, zero; also, the financial, geostrategic, political and public support for the mission is hugely lower today; US empire is declining and full with menaces looming at the horizon, both at home and abroad, comparing with a total dominance in the sixties (the cold war was only an ideology made up to confuse and control people, USA and URSS were competitors in exploiting respective influence spheres but never real enemies); mission systems are way more complex today; also the lunar lander configuration is almost totally unknown today, while back then it was on the making since 1963 at least, but if you dig in the process, you discover really strange steps in the development of the LEM, with sudden leaps to the final spacecraft, in a very different fashion from the slow and smooth iterations typical of other nasa ships. So my best guess is that they landed some robotic apparatuses, maybe moving rovers too, but never sent humans to the satellite.

 

[billslugg]

"I also doubt they landed at all in 1969..." orsobubu

I knew a guy, Charles Conrad, who stepped onto the Moon on November 19, 1969. He was a good friend of mine and I don't believe he was lying.

 

[Torbjorn Larsson]

Nice progress!

Which one is for Starship v2?

None of those, they match the remaining Starship v1.

no way they will launch men on the moon in 2026, i also doubt they landed at all in 1969

According to plan, the crewed Artemis 2 launch will take place in late 2025, the Artemis 3 crewed lunar landing in 2026, the Artemis 4 docking with the Lunar Gateway in 2028, and future yearly landings on the Moon thereafter.

The contracted batch of 15 Saturn Vs was enough for lunar landing missions through Apollo 20. Shortly after Apollo 11, NASA publicized a preliminary list of eight more planned landing sites after Apollo 12, with plans to increase the mass of the CSM and LM for the last five missions, along with the payload capacity of the Saturn V.

We'll see how fast they will land on and then "launch on" the moon. Delays are common in large projects, building projects average 60 % delays, and Artemis is already delayed 2 years.

It is an observed fact that NASA landed on the Moon twice 1969, and in total 7 times between 1969 - 1972 before US decided that the program was too costly. Your personal doubt, which is actually a common conspiracy theory you have engaged in for your own reasons, do not come into this.

And notably, this conspiracy theory that involves a large organization of nearly 20,000 people is not only unsupported as all conspiracy theories - that's how they are made - and goes against observed facts - which is all too common - but it is also laughable. A science paper estimated that an organisation 1/4th that size could manage to keep a secret for a year maximum. It has been 50 years!

But the exciting thing with Starship is not the "been there, done that" Moon old hat project. It is the manned Mars capability, among other neat things.

 

[orsobubu]

I recommend you watch the film American Moon, where dozens of contradictions about the Apollo missions are meticulously exposed; I don't say with certainty that they didn't go, I give it as a concrete possibility. In my opinion they only landed robotic probes and automated rovers, whose tracks can be seen taken from the lunar satellites, while the astronauts would have been parked in Earth orbit at most. And in any case, even if they had landed, there is sufficient evidence to indicate that part of the photo/video footage must have been produced on the ground, for various logistical and technical feasibility reasons.

Weirdly, in the aforementioned film, what in my opinion is the most powerful indication of a cheat is missing, namely the too low height of the leaps on the surface, and in any case the inconsistency of the extension of these leaps between the different shots.

The two-year delay you mention is too little in my opinion, because originally the scheduled date for a landing was 2020; and in fact Artemis 1 has been 6 years late since 2016, making it easy for the landing time to extend beyond 6 years. The mere fact that space-x is involved as an essential piece of the mission makes a further delay almost a certainty for me, because Elon Musk's entire character is built on cheating in my opinion.

On the question of the organization of the scam, the answer is simple, because the almost total majority of the companies and workers involved would have carried out their work without knowing anything, in watertight compartments, and only the directors, with strictly military support staff , would have taken control of the missions, in separated locations, whose manipulated data streams would then have been transmitted to the official channels; this is also talked about in the film I mentioned.

After all, there are various examples of conspiracies of this type, just think of the Volkswagen diesel engine scandal, which only a handful of managers knew about, while the workers and technicians involved in the design, production, control and repair chain had no knowledge; it was enough to take control of the measuring equipment to falsify the results without the knowledge of anyone around the world.

 

[orsobubu]

very interesting, thank you, it must have been exciting to listen to him. I'm not saying with certainty that they didn't go, I just have many doubts. If they went there, I believe that part of the photo/video material was certainly reconstructed on the ground, due to the too numerous and obvious contradictions. It would be nice if you wrote here some of Conrad's sentences that particularly impressed you from his memories about the mission.

 

[billslugg]

No, I am not going to exert the tiniest bit of effort to try and validate your absurd claims. The burden of proof is entirely on you. Good luck.

 

[orsobubu]

okay but you didn't understand that I was really interested in knowing some interesting anecdote that came from an original source, there was no instrumental intent

 

[billslugg]

Why would you care to hear stories of a liar?

 

[Unclear Engineer]

My theory is that orsobubu is not real.

 

[Classical Motion]

I think us going to the moon is due to competition. Especially from China. But we also have Russia and India and Japan. We have to reserve a parking spot. Some say it's a matter of security for us to have a manned moon base first. How much territory does a landing site have? Where's the boundary of private and international territory? How will the moon be divided?

And now that private companies can provide this service, other rich countries will be in the rush too. All that's needed is a hotel and trading post. Perhaps a blacksmith.

Moon pioneers.

 

[Rob77]

Very nice - but do they have all the raptor engines? That would be 128 engines ready to go!
If so that's more impressive than the stainless steel cylinders.

 

[orsobubu]

Why would you care to hear stories of a liar?

I never said he was a liar, i said "part of the photo/video material was certainly reconstructed on the ground", and i'm referring in particular to apollo 11 mission. Sure i have a lot of doubts about all the program but this is an ongoing personal project; as you said, who has to provide the proofs is me, and i'm specially interested in biomechanic equations of human movement. There is something wrong there in my opinion.

In 1969, 4 years old, i was stealing (from my relatives' home) and collecting copies of the weekly italian magazine Epoca (Epoch), licensing the original famous articles from Time Life editions reporting the missions. This was years before the Gulf energy crisis, so the pages were incredibly thick and large, and the photos absolutely stunning to me. My parents sent me to bed in 1969 during the landing, so i religiously found and defended my treasures through numerous wanderings across italy with my family until today. The collection was far from complete, and in 2006, i bought on ebay the rare entire set of copies 1964-1974, circa 1000€; they arrived at my house with a truck loaded with tenth of big boxes; incredibly, on the top of the first box i opend before signing the check, there was the special issue containing the transcript of the full conversation among armstrong aldrin collins and the control room. So i was reassured and paid. After carrying the boxes to the fourth floor, i discovered the seller was a fraudster and he had meticulously removed all of the color inserts at the center of the magazine to sell them apart (aside from the cover, they represented the real value of the items). I run to the bank to irregularly invalidate the check, and then i had some minor problems with police for this.
Anyway, i've upoloaded a photo with the older issue of my collection here:

luna.jpg

drive.google.com

i'm sure i also have the apollo 12 issue, but i cannot find it now; but surely Conrad was one of my heroes as a child!

 

[billslugg]

I am sorry you got cheated.

Your assertion any portion of any Moon landing was fake is a slur upon the hundreds of thousands of people who participated. That I should discount every single one of them and rather believe "some guy on the internet" is not going to happen so don't waste your time with me. Expound on for the sake of our other readers, though. I'll watch.