Comments by "" (@charlesvan13) on "Scott Manley" channel.

  1. They have tested this by having people live in rotating facilities on Earth. The difference in the rotation tends to make you sick. You're not in a constant gravity filed like on Earth. If you throw a ball it will curve into the wall. You need a large radius or you'd get nauseous.
    49
  2. @ Nasa can't even put astronauts in orbit. They relied on Russia after 2011, and now on SpaceX.
    4
  3. Shouldn't space shuttle contractors loose their jobs? The space shuttle program lost two entire vehicles killing 14 astronauts. Was it even cheaper than the previous disposable rockets, such as the Saturn 1b, which could have taken 5 astronauts to the ISS?
    3
  4. SLS has more thrust than the Saturn V, but it has less payload to LEO. Saturn V could launch 310,000 lbs to LEO versus 209,000 -- 290,000. Am I missing something here? Is the TLI stage more efficient, so weighs less?
    2
  5. Gravity depends on the density also. If a planet is made out of less dense material and 1.27 Earth masses, the surface will be much further from the center of gravity.
    1
  6. Why not just build Saturn rockets? Why do they insist on deriving the vehicle from a lame launch system, the shuttle. During Apollo they could launch astronauts and payload to orbit with the Saturn IB and launch a smaller payload to Earth escape velocity with the Saturn V.
    1
  7. Mach 1 isn't remotely near what's needed to get to space. There's so many of these funded scams. Projects which will never work, but get supporters and millions in funding. Such as the Hyperloop. It's so obvious that no one is ever going to build a giant death trap of a train that runs in a vacuum pipe, with the constant danger of explosive decompression.
    1
  8. I think it would be much easier to build a separate trans lunar shuttle, which wouldn't need wings or a heat shield. It could be launched into parking orbit, or ISS, on an unmanned SLS rocket. It could be reused if they find a way to get H/LOX into space to refuel it.
    1
  9. They could have used Danny DeVito so it would look even bigger.
    1
  10. Some of that foam destroyed Shuttle Columbia. It punched a hole in the left wing, causing it to burn up on re-entry.
    1
  11. 0:44 "Was reimagined in 2010 to make it more affordable." How come the government only cares about "affordable" if it's something cool? Congress and Biden were passing 2 trillion dollar, inflationary, spending bills. But we could send astronauts to Mars for 500 billion.
    1
  12. OK. I call BS on your optimistic analysis. A 10,000 g centrifuge is not going to hold together. The rocket and the centrifuge will fly apart. Furthermore, the rocket will launch with a 40 rpm nose over tail spin, which will immediately destroy its aerodynamics.
    1
  13. SpaceX is active and Nasa is not.
    1