[romwell]

>It was a epoch defining change. It does feel like a ton of time ago, and everyone in the industry (most notably ULA, Arianespace and the Chinese) are trying to figure out what they do now that the SpaceX steamroller is in full force.

Nitpicking on the language: why would SpaceX be a steamroller? Steamrollers are slow. Also, what does it mean for a steamroller to be in full force? Steamrollers push downward at a constant force, don't they?

I understand that SpaceX is crushing its competition, so you want to bring the steamroller metaphor, but perhaps for what you are saying other metaphors would be a better fit.

Further reading: Orwell, Politics and the English language[1]

[1]https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79p/

[thechao]

It’s an idiom.

[romwell]

It is not clear what "it" you refer to here.

Referring to SpaceX as a steamroller is a metaphor[1].

"In full force" is, indeed, an idiom that generally means "in entirety", "completely"[2]

"Steamroller in full force" is neither a metaphor nor an idiom. It's a mashup of the two, and a phrase hitherto unuttered because it doesn't carry meaning.

Put simply, the set of things that can be "in full force" generally does not include steamrollers.

Please see Orwell's essay I linked to. "Fascist octopus has sung its swan song" is an example there that is a similar mix of metaphors.

There are many ways this can be fixed; steamrollers can gain momentum, for example.

As I said - it's not a principal point; I'm nitpicking. However, I believe clear communication is important - so here is an opportunity to improve.

- [1]https://www.grammarly.com/blog/metaphor/

[2]https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/in+full+force