Comments by "snuffeldjuret" (@snuffeldjuret) on "Scott Manley" channel.

  1.  @sbkarajan  it is OK to be skeptical, but to pretend to know as you do is just silly.
    26
  2.  @texasyojimbo  really? Elon seems to improve year after year imo.
    17
  3. doesn't ring any belle.
    16
  4. it would be fun to know what science advisors they have. Probably don't need that many I guess.
    13
  5. don't think that would have made any difference in neither flights. It would also probably make things more dangerous as the Starship can get more off course then.
    11
  6. I was going to say that this was an underrated comment, but then I saw it was just half an hour old :).
    11
  7.  @wyattb3138  you are found :D.
    9
  8.  @_mikolaj_  shoot it into a test tank?
    8
  9.  @zero132132  apparently he/she likes when people are killed. I mean, how else are we to interpret it?
    8
  10. @ChermBo that is your interpretation, which is an incorrect one. Take a chill pill dude.
    7
  11.  @engineeredlifeform  you try to, but fail.
    7
  12.  @HalNordmann  it's a fun math problem! Let's say that an engine has a failure rate of 1% and let's compare a 2 engine rocket with a 9 engine rocket, where the 9 engine rocket may lose one engine, but not two! Probability of an engine failure on 2 engines: 1 - 0.99 * 0.99 =~ 0.02 = 2% Probability of 2+ engine failures on 9 engines: 1 - 0.99^9 - 9 * 0.01 * 0.99^8 =~ 0.0034 ~ 1/3 % Similar calculations tells us that a 1 engine rocket would have the same failure rate as a 15 engine rocket (with one allowed engine failure). These numbers are only examples though, with lower probability of engine failure (which has to be closer to 0.1% right? It seems to be quite uncommon), the multi rocket engines really start to shine. The 1 engine rocket now fails 0.1% of the times and the 15 engine one is down to 0.01% of multi engine failure. Super Heavy with 32 engines would be at 0.05%. So to me, it seems like it all comes down to if the rocket actually can deal with an engine failure or not (and that the engines are not prone to failure).
    6
  13.  @phoephoe795  reproducing is more important than surviving regarding why things are as they are though.
    6
  14. applause
    6
  15.  @Mungobohne1  but didn't you see how the arrow brilliantly and amazingly points from a to z in amazon? :D
    6
  16. Isn't southern California in Mexico? :P
    6
  17.  @flightoftheraven  I know, but you have to agree that it is funny that southern California isn't southern California :P.
    6
  18.  @engineeredlifeform  not sure what you are trying to do, but it is obvious to everyone that you accomplishes nothing with this... whateveritisyouaredoing.
    6
  19.  @chartle1  I was responding to you saying: "this This THIS. Tech guy 1: T minus 10 hours "Where's Micheal?" Tech 2 "I don't know" Tech 1 "ok" as Tech 2 closes up the panel without looking up at the 200 lb man is stuck there." Which does not require anyone sealing themself into a bulkhead.
    5
  20. ah yea, to call SpaceX a success would be totally not reasonable.
    5
  21.  @ikitclaw7146  not everything ever said is quotable. This was a good line, and that deserves to be pointed out.
    5
  22.  @TheEvilmooseofdoom  surprisingly many nutcases in the SM audience.
    5
  23.  john smith  you don't have to make everything about President Donald J. Trump.
    4
  24.  @h.cedric8157  "perhaps you've been successfully conditioned or numbed by all these woke materials in Hollywood, advertising, news, and in everyday mass media, that you consider woke preachy stuff as normal." Dude, did you even try to understand what I wrote? I wrote "I think this is the case for a lot of things ...", which literally means that they have failed to condition me. You are really coming off as irrational here mate. "I will say that it may not have even been your fault ..." Omg you are still going on about this? Dude, the very first thing I wrote was "I think this is the case for a lot of things ..." which essentially agrees with you in part. You really can't handle if people don't agree with you 100%, huh? "Want to see a TV show that isn't too much ..." No I want you to be specific about your claim. Which you should be if you want to be rational. Maybe being rational isn't your thing though.
    4
  25.  @tma2001  will be interesting to see if there is a similar issue with Oneweb's satellites
    4
  26. I wonder if there are any Scientologists that are Flat Earthers as well.
    4
  27. yea bellyflop will be one for the ages!
    4
  28. based on the number 110 km/h he mentioned as initial speed of the mass simulator, I get my calculations to around 50 meters up in the air in relation from its initial position of 30 meter elevation or so.
    4
  29.  Connor Hoskins  when predicting the future (if you do it honestly), you can never lie. If it doesn't happen you would just be incorrect.
    4
  30.  @off_Planet  kessler syndrome is not working on a 5 year time scale.
    4
  31.  @anguita119  "why irrational?" I explained it in the comment you replied to. Did you read it? "also I don't hate spacex" I didn't say you did, I said you were an irrational Elon hater.
    4
  32. this thread is an absolute sh*t show that displays the absolute worst about human beings.
    4
  33. indeed :).
    4
  34.  @M167A1  no matter how you twist and turn it, neither side of the story validates Russia invading Ukraine.
    3
  35.  @Ben-ij3td  oh btw "current Ukrainian government is not elected democratically." is a load of crap. Ukraine is not Russia or China.
    3
  36. do we know the lifetime is only a few years?
    3
  37. real reason is obviously to unify the lobbying money to fight SpaceX :P.
    3
  38.  @incognitoburrito6020  "Assuming China's telling the telling the truth..." Why would anyone ever assume that?
    3
  39. 7:05 that recreation by nickhenning3d looks almost comically professional, like the ones you've seen on TV your entire life :P.
    3
  40.  @David-yy6hp  a lot thinner :P. Regarding engine optimization, it is close to a vacuum is it not?
    3
  41.  @walter2990  and currently it is quote horrible browsing twitter without having an account.
    3
  42.  @randomnickify  I wouldn't be surprised if the majority would know, it seems like a quite well known game, even among those who haven't played it.
    3
  43. I have been thinking the same thing. Maybe it could be quite easy, compared to not doing it.
    3
  44. so I guess Iran just joined the Globe Earth conspiracy. What is in it for them?
    3
  45.  @Jester-Riddle  why? They have the training to pilot the capsule... Were you not aware of this?
    3
  46.  @TomSmith-li5se  is it though? Isn't it a better situation to most likely die tomorrow compared with for sure dying today?
    3
  47.  @TomSmith-li5se  it is indeed a valid and rational thought, nothing stupid about it.
    3
  48.  @TomSmith-li5se  you don't seem to understand. If your leg is stuck in a machine that will FOR SURE kill you, won't you cut your leg off to survive? How is it anything but rational to do what you have to survive? That is the most rational thing there is, because life wants to keep living.
    3
  49. it seems they have already reached a deal :).
    3
  50. or just put a thousand engines on that thing!
    3