Who cares about a deserted control room, does how many people sitting or standing really matter?
Not deserted. Just doesn't require a lot people. there isn't much to monitor or control.
just workers watching the launch
it look like repeat of test flight 3
Is there a cheaper way to simulate a full-scale upper stage in a weightless vacuum, with as much fidelity as a full-scale flight test? (I'm 100% confident they've run numerous computer simulations.)
Blowing it up isn’t the point; but reality has shown us that full-scale testing is the only way to discover what failure modes appear with complete vehicles. Component testing and simulations simply cannot do that. They are valuable too, but they’re no replacement for full testing. The shift to testing more like the aviation world will be a painful one, especially for anyone for whom failure is not an option, but spaceflight will be healthier once that transition is done.
Not necessarily. While not perfect, every stage is heavily instrumented and festooned with cameras, so there’s a lot of data that SpaceX gets that isn’t exposed to the public.
It was a rhetorical question. At some point you have to go fly. Naval gazing only gets you so far.
Yes, it does when comes down to fluid and structural dynamics. There is no way of doing this sub scale. Can't make smaller engines, can't have smaller tanks, can't have smaller fluid lines, etc. They will not react the same way as full scale.
there is no way to simulate long term (> 30 seconds) weightlessness and much less on a large body. There is no way to fire an upper stage in vacuum on earth. 100k feet the max simulated altitude plus Starship is too big.
Nope. Every point is wrong. Cheap transportation has to come first. That has been proven over and over. It has been past the time that you learn that. You still haven't learned from history and think spaceflight is special and has different rules (or should have special rules). You keep repeat the same nonsense and don't listen to others when they have proven you wrong, much like a moon hoaxer.
Recall what the NASA budget was at this time. They were almost close to "unlimited money", with governmen willing to sign basically any cheque - providing that NASA would be able to put men on the Moon before Russians would.
What exactly do you not understand here? The orbital module detached from the rocket, rotated, and used its maneuvering engines (small boxes with nozzles at its sides) to firstly dock with the lunar module, and then pull lunar module from the rocket.
Orbital mechanic, dude.
There were humans inside who performed control on each stage of flight.
And by mid-1950s they were all home in Germany, because it became obvious that Soviet engineers far outpassed German wartime knowledge.
The Soviets were more security-oriented, and while they recognized that German scientists might be useful, they weren't essential anymore. Their ideas became less advanced than the ideas of Soviet own engineers.
It was only a stunt and a race, and not a sustained exploration program.
Wrong, the Germans had nothing to do with any crew spacecraft (Mercury, Gemini or either Apollo). They had nothing to do with the spacecraft that crashed, orbiter or landed (Ranger, Lunar Orbiter and Surveyor) on the moon. Neither the spy sats or the ICBMs for the military. They didn't do solid motors.
Except Space X can do all that?
They can do LOw-Earth Orbit satellite deployment, see Falcon 9.
They mistakenly tried to do things on the cheap.
wrong on every point. And what Germans after Paperclip.
That is wrong. Redstone, Jupiter and Saturn are all because of his involvement.
