Some folks in this sub are toxic, too -- notice the 3 people in this conversation bringing up Covid, hurricanes, and mystical beings?

I don't see any predictions about Covid or hurricanes in the article. Are we reading the same one?

No, she starts with no seniority.

Senator Shelby's replacement is his former chief of staff, Katie Britt.

Edit: mo info

The easiest solution is what Energia and Shuttle did: don't put the big thing into orbit. People even talked about this before the first CZ-5B launch.

This one has only maneuvered once in 90 days.

The current plan is 10 more launches of it by the end of 2024.

Love the insults! Do you find them effective when you're trying to change people's minds?

Ariane 5 launch halted indefinitely as Kourou unrest continues -- 2017

Branson spun off Virgin Orbit from Virgin Global. Virgin Orbit has been to orbit.

The congressional ban against collaborating with China, you know, the ban u/fluffy_assassins was pretending to be unaware of. And is grateful to have learned about, when they already knew about it.

> Could nuclear perhaps satisfy the requirements?

If you have a superconducting tape that goes around the whole planet, half of it is in sunlight.

u/-Baloo thought they were doing a good thing by educating you, but instead their time was wasted. Maybe you could be honest next time?

You can't compare revenue to profit/loss like that. Boeing lost $3.3 billion in Q3 on deliveries of 112 commercial planes.

Belarus is giving Russia T-72A tanks, which were built up to 1985, and some T-62 tanks, produced up to 1975, and which Belarus retired by the year 2000.

I know it wasn't you who said it, but the discussion started with:

> quite a few hypersonic missiles with good track records.

... and it's not really interesting to discuss only the first half. Russia has a lot of weapons that supposedly have the right features, and they suck when you try to use them.

OneWeb is paying $121 million per GSLV 3 launch, and A64 can carry a lot more satellites per launch.

Edit: and if you look at the r/ISRO thread, now it appears that one newspaper got it wrong, and the launches were $60mm each.

Many competitors to Starlink launch on Falcon: OneWeb, Eutelsat, SES, Intelsat, Inmarsat, Viasat, basically everyone other than Amazon Kuiper uses or has used Falcon.

Also, SpaceX is selling Falcon launches to Nothrop Grumman to take Cygnus to resupply the ISS -- Cygnus competes with Dragon for the Commercial Resupply program.

India uses Ariane to launch satellites too massive for India's rockets.

Does it? This project is late, over budget, and keeps on awarding big bonuses to the primes. Which of these problems is improved by setting up a joint venture?