Comment Re:I can tell this article is worthless from the s (Score 2) 333
NASA, France Skeptical of SpaceX Reusable Rocket Project
Yes, that's a lovely headline. But the original headline ("NASA, CNES Warn SpaceX of Challenges in Flying Reusable Falcon 9 Rocket") tells the same story with 42% less bullshit.
NASA found that it was not worth trying to reuse the space shuttle main engines after every flight without extensive refurbishment.
Really? So because the space shuttle couldn't do it, nobody could do it, perhaps by learning lessons from the shuttle program? If this is an example of the kind of thinking in the article, it's a fat waste of time. If it isn't an example, why mention it at all?
I went ahead and skimmed the article, and indeed, the sole counterexample to the potential of reuse continues to be the space shuttle. The article is crap. Flush.
Ugh, why can't people comprehend mildly complex topics? You contradict yourself in your post so much that it hurts.
NASA "warns", does not mean NASA "says it is impossible".
NASA "warns" implies it IS possible but there are other challenges to overcome.
Basic comprehension people.