Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

lughnasadh OP t1_jcyxzmj wrote

Submission Statement

We are used to anything space-based requiring massive engineering efforts and equally massive budgets.

This is interesting as it points to a future where cheap manufacturing could predominate. No doubt, there would still be a need for huge and complex engineering efforts, but if some useful space-based resources could be made this easy, wouldn't they quickly increase in number? Particularly as cheap reusable rockets predominate in the launch sector.

26

TheAntiMosby t1_jd3cxgy wrote

Hey there, Dan here. I was an Engineering Analyst on this project, and can tell you that aside from the frame, everything was either bought at a large store or 3D printed at home. The most expensive part was still the launch, however, which was donated to us by D-orbit.

2

BillHicksScream t1_jczkunr wrote

No. Thats not how development works here. The list of problems for humans operating in Space has only increased. Nor has there been any required breakthrough in a new method of energy usage, something to escape orbit and move through space cheaply. You will notice there is no fusion/warp/new element powered minivans.

There is no huge demand to fuel development anyways. Unlike the airplane, whose development is fueled by four factors: a cheap, common energy source, WW 1+2, lots of commercial & governmental uses to pay for development and the #1 reason: Flying is possible. Birds exist.

But there are no alien spaceships, which would tell us Star Trek is possible.

−21

Fit_Manufacturer_444 t1_jd08r8d wrote

The downvotes on this comment shows how uneducated and braindead it is

11

BillHicksScream t1_jd111ff wrote

Humans like to dream. Its part of what makes us great.

But Neil Postman was right. We are Amusing Ourselves To Death - and Space is just one thing that's pretty cool to dream about. https://youtube.com/watch?v=3G8a4Tdnab8

And I can see now how Musk + Co. are intentionally selling fake future dreams to avoid the expensive work of dealing with the looming negative ecological & social disorder.

−2

Emble12 t1_jd24ocq wrote

You don’t think a decrease of cost to orbit by a literal order of magnitude is a significant development?

5

BillHicksScream t1_jdayw5n wrote

>by a literal order of magnitude

LOL. You even repeat Musk's inane phrasing. Vaporbrain.

1

Emble12 t1_jdbe038 wrote

Ah yes, because Musk invented basic maths? Jesus.

1

BillHicksScream t1_jdd2qtc wrote

LOL. "a literal order of magnitude" makes no sense. It doesnt work as English and the current state of development is so primitive there's nothing to compare.

1

Emble12 t1_jdec2ks wrote

When you decrease something logarithmically by 10, that’s reducing by an order of magnitude. “Literal” is used because the phrase is often used in a hyperbolic sense. I was specifically referring to the difference between the Shuttle/SLS and Falcon 9.

1