I dont know why people care about the SpaceX landing.
NASA did the same 10 years ago.
Proof:
https://youtu.be/FZ-H-A9Vzdo
>>7737703
NASA is a joke. The real innovation happens though military contracts: R&D
>>7737703
This is some proper quality bait. I'm impressed :p. Only sad thing is that people might actually think this is real.
>>7737703
I'd literally suck Elon Musk's dick if he'd let me. Honestly, I love the fuck out of the guy no homo
Daily reminder that Space Travel is literally fucking useless.
>>7737768
It is useless for now, but everything was useless in the beginning.
>>7737768
It will be humanity's last hope of preservation one day.
It's not useless.
>>7737771
But the universe will end my friend. Also what's the point of preservation for the sake of preservation?
>>7737774
It's called survival.
>>7737774
>Also what's the point of preservation for the sake of preservation?
Why don't you kill yourself? What's the point of living?
>>7737703
10 years?? WTF
STS-1 landed 14 April 1981, 18:20:57 UTC @Edwards airforce base
34years ago!!
>>7737768
>Daily reminder that Space Travel is literally fucking useless.
You can tell this guy knows his shit.
Only the best and brightest use "daily reminder" and pointless use of "literally".
>>7737774
>But the universe will end my friend.
>We've only got 10^15 to 10^100 years left, it's all pointless.
>>7737959
THIS
I really don't get the point of carrying all that extra fuel to orbit.
Why not use wings or parachutes?
>>7737993
Wings and parachutes don't work as well on Mars
>>7737993
yes, because carrying wings and parachutes into orbit doesn't require any additional fuel at all
>>7738007
It seems like it would be less weight, but of course I haven't done any research or anything.
Nice strawman tho...
>>7737993
>I really don't get the point of carrying all that extra fuel to orbit.
Because saving a tiny bit of fuel (in comparison to its takeoff fuel), for the re-entry+landing, means they can save the most expensive bits of the whole rocket: Stage 1 section. The rocket motors.
So it is VERY worth it.
>>7738059
As we saw last night, wings are not necessary to return the rocket engines. The shuttle was a terrible design.
>>7738017
>factual statements are strawmen
liberals pls go.
Daily reaminder that NASA wouldn't exist without Nazis and other smart people whos not from USA.
>>7738475
Daily reminder that Von Braun would be without a clue if not for the groundbreaking work of Dr Robert Goddard.
wow
>>7737719
I'd have a bunch of my men go over to his house with spatulas to spank dat ass
>>7738002
>muh Mars landings
Apex kek. Raiding social media really has helped their PR a lot it would seem. Never underestimate the amount of retards on the internet.
NASA managed to deploy 11 satellites for under $80mln 10 years ago?
'cause the landing and recovery, while hyped, isn't the true breakthrough. Reducing the launch costs to something considerably below $80mln is the true revolution.
Shuttle launches were $800mln/launch.
>>7738609
like, $10m?
