@ailepet The ISS core was originally going to be called Mir 2, then the USSR imploded and paying Roscosmos to launch the pieces gave NASA an orbital construction shack (while they played catch-up) and kept a bunch of Russian rocket scientists in paid work so they didn't emigrate to China or North Korea.
@cstross That's because we followed the Mir-influenced school of space station interior design, instead of Raymond Loewy's designs for Skylab (I guess?)
@cstross Also feels like The Expanse on screen vs the books, as the adaption has fairly typical sci-fi sets, and the book is like "It was the largest office he had seen in space, 2 metres wide..."
There's a SF/comedy series, Avenue 5, in which the passengers ride around in the Apple Store picture and the crew below live and work in the second picture.
In fact, the captain and the shiny bridge crew are all actors...
@cstross Production version versus prototype. (Although the Nostromo is probably a better comparison as a work rather than passenger/consumer production version)
@cstross Oh, as long as they focus on the commercial launches they should be OK. The fancy lunar/martian part of Starship won't work.
Twitter is on it's arse. Tesla is overvalued as an auto maker, and has lost it's edge in actual tech so there is going to be a reckoning there some point.
How SpaceX survives will be an interesting watch, especially wrt any projects strongly linked to Musk's over-promise-under-deliver technobabble schtick!
@cstross Maybe, but the NASA funding for Spaceship's lunar stuff is dependent on them hitting some very precise targets (which SpaceX & Musk signed up to). They got ~$3bn and must have blown through most of that, with many more launches required.
They didn't hit LEO last time either.
I wonder how much cash SpaceX has, and whether it can fully self-fund Starship. Any engines used here can't be used for their commercial shipments.
Plus if Musk self-destructs the jury is out on everything.
@HairyChris Naah, Starship's going to fly again within a month or two: the last test achieved most of its goals and SpaceX (currently floating with a valuation of $175Bn) absolutely needs it to launch the Starlink 2 cluster (the new sats are too big to fly economically on Falcon 9). I reckon they'll lose at most 1-2 more prototypes during the test program then get it working smoothly.
@HairyChris Don't forget the size of payload shrouds and the space shuttle's payload bay—while there's a prototype expandable module docked to the ISS (BEAM) most of the modules are rigid metal pressure vessels that had to fit inside a launch vehicle's payload.
(Starship, with a 9m diameter, is a huge increase over the Shuttle's 4.6M wide payload bay.)
@cstross in fairness if we're going to do mad things like go to mars we're going to need to do it in something that earns the name of "ship”, not the barely-afloat row-boats we've been using so far. like we needed ships to get across the oceans, notwithstanding the odd nutter in a rowboat (with GPS and satellite radio and rescue services on-hand).
@rbanffy@HairyChris Boeing as it used to be is dead—eaten from the inside-out by McDonnell-Douglas management after the merger and reconfigured in McD-D's image, they're now a bloated trad defense industry contractor who can't innovate or build spacegoing hardware to spec and on time.
@cstross@HairyChris I can't wait to see what Bigelow(Boeing?) can fit inside a Starship cargo bay. Or, even cooler, a Superheavy-launched expendable second stage.