Because they have more money than you. Disposable income is going to be disposed of, one way or another.
That's a very good point and quite likely along the lines of what happened. Could be a challenging thing to fix, and may also have implications for orbital fuel transfers.
Yeah I still think that's within their grasp with only minor modifications. Obviously, not testing the engine relight is a big hurdle, but beyond that it's just about a little bit of attitude control and then they can de-orbit into the ocean as before.
Actually getting the craft to survive re-entry, and even land and be re-used is a much bigger task, but it wouldn't take too much to get Starship in the position where it can launch Starlink V2's.
Yeah to me it looked like they didn't really have any sort of attitude control system (eg RCS thrusters) for while they were in space. As soon as the rocket stopped firing it was spinning, albeit very gently at first.
I'm more interested in knowing what happened with the booster after it's boost back burn, where some of the engines seemed to shut off on their own before the rest were cut. This issue is likely also responsible for the failed suicide burn. Also, why they didn't try the orbital relight of the Starship engines. If the orbital relight was skipped because of orientation issues, then shame on them for not remembering that you can stablise your craft in KSP with just a little bit of vectored rocket burn.
These are apparently still just flying grain silos, a long way away from the full finished product. However it does seem like they're at the cusp of having a viable satellite launch vehicle, even if the re-entry stuff is still bugged.
This is brilliant! Should be longer though.
Cat.
That has little to nothing to do with the current state of affairs at Boeing. The current situation was brought about by the merger between Boeing and McDonnell Douglas, with the MDD executives joining Boeing's board of directors and continuing the same shitty behaviour. Eg, with the MD-10 and its cargo door, the issue was raised at design stage, denied until after 2 massive fatal accidents occurred, and then they tried to get around it with "gentleman's agreements" with the FAA - just like with the MCAS issue on the 737 MAX.
The problems can be pinned down to a very small number of executives, who belong in prison.
The only problem with them braking is trying to find parts, because they've stopped producing them. In terms of having to work on them they're still generally well designed.
Yeah the only real downside is finding parts for them, but they're proper engineer's cars.
Context?
Edit: the top reddit comment:
It's still mind-boggling that the official position from Russia at the time was that they were not involved, and troops were just on vacation. And the wester governments were like hur-dur-dur, I'd like to speak to the manager.
I still don't get the cubes though.
If a Pepperami is a bit of animal, then Trump is a putrid turd.