Which doesn't show the design constraints but who wants those - edit and it's not an image of the booster? Elon mentions a design feature missing from the diagram: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1093643894917492736
I would personally guess you'd need to be very careful with your implied load bearing connections between the tanks at x Kelvin and the skin at redhot reentry temperatures...
Good luck on buying spaceY.com and competing against those engineering fools at SpaceX ;)
I am mocking unreasonably, and I know I would find similar comments in my own internet history. I am hoping you will learn to be a little less thoughtless in your armchair. We all assume other rocket-science engineers must not know what they are doing but usually that just shows our own ignorance.
Let me explain once more :) . The original post which I was replying to was
-----
> So the struts (plus supporting structure) are lighter than the legs? Why is that?
Besides the other answers you've received, the lugs hold the booster from (near) the top. This means that the body of the booster is in tension during and after landing. Legs, on the other hand, support the landing load and weight after loading in compression. The booster is basically a thin-shelled tube, which is limited in compression strength (for a given wall thickness) by buckling; in tension, the strength approaches the strength of the material, so less additional reinforcement is needed in the structure to support landing loads.
-----
Note how the author says that a thin-shelled tube is limited in compression strength by buckling. Technically it's correct, but practically if you put some extra pressure in that tube - which, after all, has also airtight caps on both ends - then the tube becomes much stronger, and is able to withstand reasonable forces during landing.
That's what I noted, and I can repeat that. I am quite sure SpaceX engineers considered that possibility, and I think they rejected that because they felt they see an even better result. I'm trying to see that here.
I also suspect that you don't know my qualifications in the area, and referring to armchair ones just so. It's interesting how many different and widely qualified people participate in HN discussions.
Rewrite:
"Why doesn't [huge successful project] do [simple thing]?"
At least link to some details of the design? Here's the best diagram of the tank design I could find:
https://www.elonx.net/wp-content/uploads/SpaceX-BFR-spaceshi...
Which doesn't show the design constraints but who wants those - edit and it's not an image of the booster? Elon mentions a design feature missing from the diagram: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1093643894917492736 I would personally guess you'd need to be very careful with your implied load bearing connections between the tanks at x Kelvin and the skin at redhot reentry temperatures...
Good luck on buying spaceY.com and competing against those engineering fools at SpaceX ;)
I am mocking unreasonably, and I know I would find similar comments in my own internet history. I am hoping you will learn to be a little less thoughtless in your armchair. We all assume other rocket-science engineers must not know what they are doing but usually that just shows our own ignorance.