Comments by "snuffeldjuret" (@snuffeldjuret) on "" video.

@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
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
@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
@anguita119 "And when had it happened to spacex? ALL WITH THEIR MOUTHS CLOSED" The massive difference is that SpaceX actually actively tries to not make it happen, while China didn't give a bleep, it was the intended design. What is even worse than elon fanboy are irrational haters like you.
3
@anguita119 do you honestly think there is value in having a discussion with an irrational Elon hater like you? As soon as you lose the argument, you change the topic. China didn't care to de-orbit, SpaceX did. End of discussion. You are wrong, and irrational for both not understanding that to begin with and now refuse to acknowledge the significance of that difference. I'll give you one thing though, I am impressed you didn't write anything in all caps in that last comment. Good job!
3
@bobiboulon "Well, at least you thought I was not joking... I got some other person that understood it was a joke, but who is still not happy about it." This is why we can't have nice things :P.
2
@JohnDoe4321 The TF hater channel lies and is wrong though as well. Just as an example, he didn't even know SN8 had header tanks when he analyzed the launch (or more accurately, the landing). Talk about being incredibly ignorant on the topic.
2
could it really get any worse? :D
2
@anguita119 "If it's so bad talking to me, why do you keep doing it?" I said discussion. This is not a discussion, it is me informing you of your errors. "Why don't you just assume that I'm right ..." Because I am not insane. "... where do you get your argument that China didn't care to de-orbit?" From the design of the Long March 5B rocket. This isn't the first time this happened with this rocket, in case you didn't know. And just to be clear, this is and was always about controlled de-orbit. "... they have ways to de-orbit the rockets ..." Not the Long March 5B, which you were referring to when you said "... when the Chinese rocket went out of control, everyone said that "they would have to worry more", "Chinese as always", etc. And when had it happened to spacex? ALL WITH THEIR MOUTHS CLOSED ..." "Fuck according to you just because one does not get de-orbit does it mean that they do not care about anything?" You should leave obvious mischaracterizations like that out of your comments. "Also in case you don't know if they care about security, they are building another space center with access to the sea ..." I know. You should not be under the illusion that you can inform me about anything related to this. This exchange is not you informing me about anything or a discussion about anything, this is just me informing you about your errors. Nothing else.
2
I wonder how easy it would be for them to transition Starship into BFR, literally. It should be cheaper anyway, just not so dramatically.
1
@jordanturner97 "and you better hope the landing goes off flawlessly because if something wrong does happen you are guaranteed to die as there is no way of escape." Define "go wrong". It seems something went wrong on SN15 landing. They said beforehand that they were going to fire three engines in the initiation of the landing sequence. Only two fired though, and it was not the optimal two, so it looks like they managed to land even though they had an engine failure.
1
I would love that as well.
1