/sci/ - Science & Math

I’m not superstitious, but it is kinda funny how “Mission 13” has failed on a few launches. RocketLabs failure isn’t going to help ease people’s superstitions haha.

Also why did it fail? Was it because of that retarded battery setup?

Also in other news SN5 is doing well. She passed her cryo but didn’t make much fuss over it.

>>11846440
I always saw the “big three” (and Val) as being the ultimate chads of KSP, and all the other kerbals are just nerdy engineers.

>>11843041
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Even if Starship fails at a lot of its objectives, it would still be totally revolutionary. Even if it-

>Put 50 tons into LEO
>Cost $50 Million per launch
>Was unable to go to mars

It would still BTFO every rocket currently flying or planned to fly for at least a decade or two.

I’m genuinely worried about what a timeline without SpaceX would’ve looked like. And we were close to this too, as they just had one more Falcon 1 flight before they were done. I know it worked, but still, crazy we almost lived in a world without them.

>Starship doesn’t exist
>Falcon rockets don’t exist
>US Lacks ability to carry cargo back to Earth from the station
>Rely kn probably Lockheed and Boeing for Commercial Crew
>SLS still gets delayed, but we have no other alternatives so we just wave them on.
>Reusable rockets are still a “What if?” Meme.