News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:SpaceX launches Starlink sats in record 10th liftoff, lan... by pfdietz on Sunday May 09, 2021 @05:26PM (#27099954)
That's why I said "evolving". Making engines better, introducing FSW when it was introduced, and so on. The F9-like boosters that could have been made around 1972 would still have been much better than the shuttle turned out to be.

What one should object to in this scenario is the idea that the conventional aerospace companies, and NASA, would have done anything like this, when their internal incentive structures pushed them away from it.

Re:SpaceX launches Starlink sats in record 10th liftoff, lan... by bodhiandphysics on Sunday May 09, 2021 @05:29PM (#27099982)
We did build an f-9 like booster around the time of the shuttle, the delta ii. It doesn’t compare to falcon. Neither does Antares, built at the same time as the f-9
Re:SpaceX launches Starlink sats in record 10th liftoff, lan... by pfdietz on Sunday May 09, 2021 @06:00PM (#27100230)
Delta-II was not a F9-class launcher. The first stage thrust (ignoring strapons, which one should because F9 doesn't use them) was less than 1/7th that of the F9. A closer match was the Saturn IB.
Re:SpaceX launches Starlink sats in record 10th liftoff, lan... by bodhiandphysics on Sunday May 09, 2021 @06:03PM (#27100257)
Delta ii was designed around boosters! Also when falcon 9 was developed its target payload was ten tons to Leo, similar to delta ii’s 8
Re:SpaceX launches Starlink sats in record 10th liftoff, lan... by pfdietz on Sunday May 09, 2021 @07:07PM (#27100704)
F9 1.0's payload to LEO was 11.5 tons, vs. (up to) 6.8 tons for Delta II.

Yes, D9 was designed around boosters. This means D9 is a different kind of design than F9. I'm contending that a more F9-like design, like Saturn 1B, could have evolved into something like the F9 over time. D-II could not have.

Re:SpaceX launches Starlink sats in record 10th liftoff, lan... by pfdietz on Tuesday May 11, 2021 @07:20AM (#27116671)
DII, not D9