Thread by @deusexmoniker

People just now finding out that starlink satellites are raining down from low orbit faster than they can be replaced is kinda funny

They are meant to fall back into orbit and burn up. In case you didn't know that. Planned obsolescence was built in. But also, that's why the full net of starlink satellites will never be a real thing. Once you hit a certain number of satellites, the rate up and down equalize

Starlink relies on growth of that net by increasing the number of launches that spacex can make. But SpaceX isn't improving its boosters or its rockets at the pace required to make that happen

Starship is not what's used to carry satellites but it makes a fine example. The v1.0 was supposed to carry 200T. It couldn't. V2.0 was supposed to carry 150T. It couldn't. V3.0 was 100 T. Couldn't. V4.0, the current version if I'm not out of date, will eventually be...

Capable of carrying 50T. you see what I mean?

The number of launches that is projected to keep starlink afloat has quadrupled quietly without most people paying attention. But the actual math of all of this was available starting in 2019 when progress slowed on development. I guess starlink shareholders are just finding out

This is why Artemis 2 and 3, and the next ISS have all been delayed, some of them indefinitely. Nasa tied it's carriage to the wrong horse. Simple as that

.

There have been signs people chose to ignorecnbc.com/2021/11/30/elo…

Within a few months of this letter warning employees of bankruptcy was leaked, he showed up to a board meeting so high he had to be removed from the meeting. Then this came out

hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-…

He's not exactly been hiding the stress of seeing the rocket payloads decrease. He's been cracking under it. Maybe he even borrowed against his tesla shares to finance aspects of the other two companies. I sure hope so. I love a story that ends well

My theory of the case on the letter about bankruptcy was that he had received 4 billion in government money to develop the rocketry for a moon flyby, Artemis 2 and 3, and the next ISS, and then he had to tell the government spacex wasn't going to meet any of their deadlines.

And that's also what spawned the sudden urgency to buy the government. He blew that entire federal wad and has vaporware. This isn't a theory. The money is gone but starship doesn't exist. It's technically vaporware.

It's supposed to be powering a mission to mars right now. This quarter. And a mission to build a moon base. Both missions scuttled because of spacex

To give you an idea of how far behind the ball they are, the rocket that exploded some weeks ago, the rocket that ran out of fuel and crashed into the Indian ocean, the one that lost it's nosecone but still managed to land recently, THESE ARE ALL STARSHIP

They are still trying to make something that doesnt struggle to get out of orbit or fall apart or explode in the line of rockets the government paid for when they are supposed to be parked on the moon right now ready to come back and make history

Now put yourself in his shoes for a minute. He's 53 and desperately wanted to go to mars himself. But his rocket is delayed for years. Now he can't go. At best he'll be near 60 when this becomes possible. He's aged out of being an astronaut. I would do alot of drugs too.

If you loved watching theranos melt down, you haven't seen anything yet

@jux_jacy Neuralink is a thing I took a look at like 3 years ago but the videos looked very fake so I stopped paying attention. Could be they faked it till they made it, I don't really know. But SpaceX launches are hard to miss and government contracts are public.

@Heaney555 42,000 satellites being maintained by a small fleet of rockets capable of carrying 6T is never going to be feasible

You don't need an astronomer to stand in for a calculator

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555 If this iteration of starship fails like the first 3 iterations, they will lower the payload capability again for the fourth time and it will take even more launches to hit the peak number

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555 It's pretty clear they were fake numbers to start and shrank down to reality somewhat.

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555 I'd be happy to clip the video for you

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555 I only mentioned the dragon line of rockets because it's the only other thing that exists besides the falcon line. None of them have the payload capability to maintain 10,000 satellites working nonstop, much less 42,000

Until starship exists, we don't get to count it

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555 At 1760 pounds per satellite, that's significantly less satellites than originally planned per trip, which means more launches to get them up there and more to replace them. Like I don't know how to make the math clear to someone that doesn't want it to be clear

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555 When you reach 13,000 satellites or so, a third of the completed net, you need an entire fleet of starships at 40-50 ton payloads just to maintain that number.

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555 When you get into the 30,000 range, starlink becomes the most expensive broadband infrastructure on the planet, far outstripping Verizon and at&t

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555 And that includes the debt of those 2 companies as assets

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555 And that's assuming that they don't have to add anymore skeleton inside the rocket to keep it from flying apart, which is where I assume all that initial payload weight ended up going, from 300T down to 50.

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555 The current price of starlink is 349 to install plus 960 dollars per year. To float that level of infrastructure, including the dedicated rocket fleet, they need like a 55 million customers.

@4E69636F6C6173 @Heaney555 That's a full order of magnitude more than they have currently. (4.6 million)