Comments by "Raptor White" (@raptorwhite6468) on "Scott Manley" channel.

  1.  @scoobtube5746  Why everyone who says this knows totally nothing about space travel nor old cinematography
    5
  2. During Apollo, they tried all they could to ensure that missions won't fail, for obvious reasons, here taking a risk was a better idea than spending billions
    4
  3. Telescope isn't a microscope, it can't show much details. Taking so detailed photos of lunar surface would probably just result in a white image, because of how bright it is, and Landers would still be to small to see. Their angular size is smaller than the size of galaxies. But even though it's not possible to take photos of landing sites with a telescope, they still had been taken by lunar satellites, one from USA and one from India.
    3
  4. Do you really think that all the people at SpaceX, with better qualifications, more experience and data were unable to figure out that the issue with Starship is one of the simplest possible problems and one that they've dealt with in the past, but you were able to?
    3
  5. Because some people are stupid, or just want to feel special
    2
  6. I'm not so sure, on previous flights second stage engine ignited a few seconds after MECO, but here the failure happened at the exact same moment
    2
  7. No, the Landers hovered for a very long time to find a safe landing site
    2
  8. They got there too a few times
    2
  9.  @LewisKerrin  What did you expect? It was a private company launching their first lander on a completely new rocket. A lot could go wrong
    2
  10.  @LewisKerrin  If you think it's that easy, why don't you send a lander yourself?
    2
  11. What color did you expect shady craters to be? There's no atmosphere to scatter light on the moon
    2
  12.  @RayleighCriterion  You mean gravity?
    2
  13. No, a space elevator has to reach a distance at which the orbital period is equal to the time it takes the planet/moon to rotate, for example geostationary orbit. For the Moon, this distance is, if my calculations are correct, is 90 000 km, which is far beyond its sphere of influence
    1
  14.  @scoobtube5746  I don't really like Star Wars and I don't say that I'm an expert, but I know enough to understand that Moon Landing wasn't as complicated as you think. All that's necessary is to make rocket move on a high enough velocity to leave Earth's orbit and get to Moon's. NASA does it a lot of times. The only thing that makes it different, is that the crew module must've been pressurized and that lunar module had to connect to it twice. That's all.
    1
  15.  @scoobtube5746  The biggest problem is money. US actually landed on the moon mostly for political reasons, so they could spend a lot of money on it. Now it's not necessary anymore.
    1
  16. Why wouldn't they?
    1
  17. That comment aged as expected
    1
  18. Fun fact: the sky is IN FRONT of the moon
    1
  19. Actually, they can only be second
    1
  20. No it's not
    1