SpaceX put more mass in orbit this year than the rest of the world combined, and you’re saying they’re not doing a good job?
No contradiction between "more than everyone else combined" and "it is unfeasable to launch 36,500 metric tons per year compared to the about-2,500 tons in the last 12 months".
Especially as the working launch vehicle is getting retired and the replacement has only had one circularized orbit, and is currently behind the development pace set by the Saturn V, N1, and even the Space Shuttle.
I suppose, depending on how you count.
The N1 was cancelled after four explosions, and the fourth Starship launch was non-explody.
But the fourth N1 launch was 10 years after the N1 work was started. Starship began work under a different name in 2012, and by 2022 it had yet to launch at all, let alone reach the non-explody stage.
If you assume all the pre-2016-rebrand work was scrapped, then you can have it beating the N1; otherwise I think my point stands.
Comparing apples to apples, this seems to be the appropriate starting point for N1:
> Studied and designed by OKB-1 since 1959, it was the counterpart to the US Saturn V
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N1_(rocket)
First launch was 1969. Starship's first launch was in 2023, so it took one extra year from initial concept to launch.
Starting from first launch, N1 did four launches in three years and never succeeded. Starship did 15 launches in three years, had multiple mission successes in which they achieved orbital velocity but had planned a suborbital trajectory, and then orbited on the 15th launch. Their first mission reaching orbital velocity was in 2024.
Also worth mentioning that a lot of the Starship work focuses on full reusability, a quite difficult problem which N1 did not attempt.
I assume you’re dirty on Usain Bolt for not running faster?
That said, a few seconds of cold gas thrust is more "cybertruck" bad than "theranos" bad.
Starlink alone is the biggest contributor to it. If i remember correctly it was 1000 tones before and because of starlink its 3000t
Starlink as is only has 10 million customers, borderline most of them people who can afford something like this.
And every other 9 billion human has to accept that the sky now has a lot more starlinks in orbit and astrophysics is disturbed.
I personally gain a lot more from astrophysicsi than from Starlink.
Good way to show your privilege.
Starlink is changing peoples lives around the world, previously the fastest they had was dialup, now they’re video calling doctors and family and doing school online.
I’ve seen it with my own eyes in rural Australia, arctic Canada and Tunisia.
Talk to people who really benefit from it.
You saw what? Rich people in other countries (a small amount of) having now fast internet?
Wow.
Now take my proper argument, stop nitpicking and compare a handful of peple on a planet with 9 Billion people.
My main argument was and is, that a lot more people are getting hurt by this than gain something. Loss of research and clear night sky and risk of atmospheric poisening vs. a handful of peple now benefitting from it...
Especially in contrast to the other option: Landlines and mobile network. Most of the planet is connected one war or the other ALREADY. Even shepards on mount everest or people in mongolia have one or the other.
“Handful of people” benefiting from it is vastly missing the mark.
Someone in a 3th world country or someone who doesn't has any real internet access, can't afford starlink.