Comments by "The Esseboy" (@TheEsseboy) on "Real Engineering" channel.

  1. My guess is that the gyrotron is going to be inside the borehole a few or several meters above the melt zone to keep cool.
    20
  2. Doing a meeting in person will always be more impactful, this will probably be for the governments and officials. And military applications ofc. But who knows, when the green transition has happened and hydrogen fuel is plentiful and cheap, it might become cheap enough to do on a large scale even in the civil sector. But that is at least two decades into the future, if not half a century or two :O
    4
  3. It's a 1 year mission, so no maintenance needed. There is no wind or moving parts after it is assembled, so no maintenance required.
    3
  4. The problem is that they do not exist (outside of military applications) and could not be transported that way without a MASSIVE security team as they run on near weapons grade plutonium or Uranium.
    3
  5. The canopy is protected from small erms :P Love your accent :)
    3
  6. Pfft...they did.
    3
  7. There is always wind somewhere, hence why a strong transmission network is good to have. Storage is already being built, it is soon not an issue.
    3
  8. Stop being scared of decimals, they are not scary.
    3
  9.  @JorenVaes  That is probably true, should be interesting to see if they can build a good enough wave guide, that sure seems like a potential downfall.
    3
  10. Ehm, if you look back in time, you literally can look anywhere...you clearly do not know how the expansion of the Universe works.
    2
  11. Yea, in poetry and literature
    2
  12. God existing is an assumption made on claims by a unscientific book...and defining their gender and characteristics is hilarious when they haven't adressed the lack of evidence...and lack of possibilities of proving supernatural things can be proven. If god where to exist it would not be beautiful, it would mean that he is one of the most evil beings ever.
    2
  13. You do realize A Starship orbital burn lasts 0.01% of the length of a year...meanwhile there are hundreds of millions of cars running 24/7 in total at all times...millions of semis, trucks, busses and thousands of airplanes...tens of thousands of big ships, tens of thousands of big powerplants... Space flight is a neglible contributor to climate change, only if rockets starts to fly 1000 times more often would it even be a noticable share of emissions. The materials used for flight however (Metals, ceramics, computers etc.) are another thing entirely, and if you factor in engineers, testing, building, maintenance. Then the total become slightly more meaningful.
    2
  14.  @Adam_Bosscoe  He did the research, what you are talking about is even older imperial units, which is kind of a loose connection. What you are trying to do is find one flaw in his argument and deman it to be thrown away as a whole based on that.
    2
  15.  @Adam_Bosscoe  Yes, but this is youtube, not a court room.
    2
  16. Oh, so landing inside a circular crater is hard? It is literally a target mark...with todays cameras and computers it would be a walk in the park to get it within 10 meters, and that is fine, there is a lot of tolerance as the lander in the middle doesn't have to be precise, you can adjust that by tensioning the cables.
    2
  17.  @zzurmzp  Because in the grand scheme of things it is pretty good. Laser precision if you wanna be pedantic is much much better than 100 meters, usually it's centimeter or millimeter level of precision
    2
  18.  @paulkerman8906  The probability of loosing engines increases exponentially as you increase the amount of engines, to get the Starship rated for humans would require them to increase the mean time between engine failures 10 fold...as a single engine failure could have a cascade effect and damage more engines. We are not talking 1 vs 9 engines, we are talking 33 vs 9, and to add to the complexity they have much higher chamber pressures, are full flow designs and use Methane instead of RP-1. My best guess is that Starship will be ready for human flight 2026 the earliest, but much more realisticly in the 2030s, if they do not drop the Raptor engine and use a much simple engine and suffer the weight penalty.
    2
  19. Really? You think studying hydrogen is the same as making nuclear weapons?! You clearly have no clue about nuclear weapons, the mission objectives or spaceprograms in general.
    2
  20. There is zero evidence it will be 100x cheaper, it will probably be closer to 10x more expensive as 12-24 Starships will need to be launched to refuel Artemis...and they are not reusable.
    2
  21. Because to become rich, you have to exploit people, pass up opportunities to help others, be arrogant and overall not a very plesant person. Just like kings, Queens, Lords and other forms of Tyrants.
    2
  22. They need clean optics and are easily disturbed by debris in the hole.
    2
  23. @ Microwaves are less distrubed by it, and they can use a waveguide to have the emitter far away from the melt zone.
    2
  24. It is called a computer, that is the easy part, the hard part is reusing the engines, the rocket body etc....and landing the second stage, not melting things and reusing the engines and body... None of which SpaceX have solved.
    2
  25.  @lucaswatson1913  No, it is sealed and filled with nitrogen purge gas.
    2
  26. When we have moved on to renewable hydrogen for fuel the prices will only plummet with more production. Only then will it become viable for commercial flights.
    2
  27.  @kennethterrell1167  And how many square miles is the surface of the moon?
    2
  28.  @kennethterrell1167  Wrong, 14,700,000 square miles, so once every 400 years, a ping pong ball sized meteroid hit a square mile of the moon....
    2
  29. What sources does the Bible cite? Has it been peer reviewed? 🤨
    2
  30. I think you mistook this video for a Bible study vid.
    1
  31. Like what? Furthering far right extreme ideas? Stopping free speech by banning and shadow banning everyone he dislikes on Twitter? By lying about self driving cars, Tesla Semi, Cybertruck, Hyperloop, Booring company, Bots on Twitter? By lying about Starship being able to land on mars by 2020? Elon Emerald mine son Musk is nothing but a hype clown...he is NOT the one you should be thankful towards...it's the engnineers at Tesla and Space X....but they are leaving on mass to be replaced by Elon Yes men. Mark my words, both companies will slowly turn for the worse UNLESS they get kickbacks from conservatives or dictatorship states.
    1
  32. No one said they would.
    1
  33. Satellites gives us very important information about our climate, weather, ocean, forests, land use, pollution etc. Not to mention exploring harsh frontiers always have resulted in furthering science. Though the startship ordeal is very wasteful as it is private, meaning next to no information leaves for public good, unlike NASA...
    1
  34.  @rising_crust  Yes, but chasing mosquitos will not help catching the lions. Exxon, Shell, Chevron, Aramco etc...those are the real offenders.
    1
  35. So because they criticise rightwing news sources for not following journalistic codes of ethics, it is a left mash up? Hmm...sounds like someone is a bit biased.
    1
  36. Yea, just like Titanum, Magnesminum, Sodminum, Potasminum, Helminum, Niobminum, Uraminum, Strontminum.
    1
  37. As they can control the way it cools they should be able to control the fiber diameter, anything above 10 microns is considered to be safe with the use of normal masks. Asbestos is dangerous because it is all the same dangerous diameter, this would make a range of diameters, not all asbestos levels of dangerous.
    1
  38.  @catmate8358  If you haven't noticed about 30-40% of the population refuses to believe in climate change, and another 20% doesn't think it is urgent at all. It's not like the majority thinks needs to be stopped quickly...
    1
  39. True, they will probably use a conventional drill rig to predrill the holes to something like 2 km
    1
  40. You just threw away all his other points...you just lost your argument. #metric
    1
  41. Starship have never flown successfully, and last time it did it lost 20% of its engines...unless they can increase engine mean time between failures by 1000%, it will never fly crewed missions.
    1
  42.  @paulkerman8906  EZ?
    1
  43.  @paulkerman8906  The falcon 9 does not have 33 engines in the first stage...it has 73% fewer engines.
    1
  44. This is called an unsteerr
    1
  45. No, Musk was trying to be like Tony Stark....Tony Stark the fictonal character was created 8 years before Elon was even born.
    1
  46. No one but car nuts noticed what model or make that was...it is the combination of middle age, divorced and driving one that is pathetic...chill.
    1
  47.  @riccardo9953  Sure, but it is a tad cringe IMO.
    1
  48.  @riccardo9953  Well, in civilized countries having headlights on is mandatory day or night. So no, not dreaming about that, it is just a headlight, chill.
    1
  49.  @riccardo9953  Are you having my comments read to you?
    1
  50. It's been done a lot in Europe, just open your eyes and call out peoples bullshit!
    1