Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Live feed of Starship SN10 flight test [video]

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 203 posts

Re: Live feed of Starship SN10 flight test [video]

#101

Post by frEdmbx »

bmitc wrote: post #60
lambda_dn wrote: post #30

NASA would have spent 2 trillion and 50 years to get to this stage. SpaceX's rapid iterations and fail fast methodology might save the human species

> SpaceX's rapid iterations and fail fast methodology might save the human species Would you mind elaborating here? How will reaching a dead planet while we actively kill the literally perfect place for us to survive and foster save the human species, exactly? And how does a fail fast methodology fit in there?

Along with all the other points made is the fact that the US is in a downward spiral with little hope of pulling out. The collapse of the US will likely be very bad for humanity, given the slavers who would replace it. SpaceX, and Musk's other endeavors, are some of the few that could keep the US afloat.

Having said all that, right now SpaceX represents by far the greatest progression to decentralizing humanity ahead of any extinction level event.

Re: Live feed of Starship SN10 flight test [video]

#102

Post by pixl97 »

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #44
jonplackett wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they just wanted to give us a good show. "You liked the landing? Cool. Here's an explosion anyway."

From the non-vertical look after it landed, and the known weak landing legs, I am guessing it damaged the structure at the bottom. It doesn't seem like they actually plan to fly them more than once (once they make their objectives). Is that correct?

At this point it is very unlikely they'll fly them more than once, at some point in the future that is the total reason why they are designing this rocket.

I think fire control is what needs to be worked on at this point. After it landed there was an uncontrolled fire, probably from leaking methane that burned for a bit and, my guess, weakend the steel leading to warping and finally a rupture.

With that said, design tests at this point were really focusing on landing so now they have the next series of design iterations figure out how to keep fuel out of the fire.

Re: Live feed of Starship SN10 flight test [video]

#103

Post by Raptor22 »

bmitc wrote: post #60
lambda_dn wrote: post #30

NASA would have spent 2 trillion and 50 years to get to this stage. SpaceX's rapid iterations and fail fast methodology might save the human species

> SpaceX's rapid iterations and fail fast methodology might save the human species Would you mind elaborating here? How will reaching a dead planet while we actively kill the literally perfect place for us to survive and foster save the human species, exactly? And how does a fail fast methodology fit in there?

You're 100% right, except for one detail: human politics. Unfortunately, the organizations here on Earth actually capable of solving the climate change problem (namely, governments) move too slowly and/or are horribly divided against themselves (see: USA). As an engineer, I look at the problem and I come to your same conclusion; It would be far, far more efficient just to save Earth than to try to colonize and terraform Mars. Unfortunately, Earth politics being what they are (hell, USA has > 500,000 deaths due to COVID and STILL around 45% of the population thinks it's fake or no worse than the flu), our only realistic option for ensuring the continuity of the species is to colonize another planet so that if the governments on Earth collectively decide to ensure its doom, there is another place where humans can continue the species.

It's sad really. But it's the reality we're dealing with.

Re: Live feed of Starship SN10 flight test [video]

#104

Post by neltnerb »

jonplackett wrote: post #52
lambda_dn wrote: post #30

NASA would have spent 2 trillion and 50 years to get to this stage. SpaceX's rapid iterations and fail fast methodology might save the human species

Reminds me of this story: The ceramics teacher announced on opening day that he was dividing the class into two groups. All those on the left side of the studio, he said, would be graded solely on the quantity of work they produced, all those on the right solely on its quality. His procedure was simple: on the final day of class he would bring in his bathroom scales and weigh the work of the “quantity” group: fifty p…

When I was an undergrad we had a trebuchet building competition between a team of mechanical engineers, and a team of physicists.

Believe if or not, the mechanical engineers were the ones who spent the entire building time making CAD models and calculating torques while the physicists just said "it is approximately a wheel" and start building immediately.

The physicists finished, and it worked beautifully on the first try with no tuning. That part was just luck for sure, but it was still beautiful to watch.

Re: Live feed of Starship SN10 flight test [video]

#105

Post by chasd00 »

I wasn’t watching a very high res stream but did anyone else notice what looked like a blackish/sooty exhaust on the way up from one engine? Maybe it was just the video feed...

My hunch is at least one engine wasn’t performing 100% but the flight control software was able to compensate pretty freaking well.

Re: Live feed of Starship SN10 flight test [video]

#106

Post by payamb »

midasuni wrote: post #26
tpmx wrote: post #8

Two of the three engines flaming out in the last few seconds, was that intentional? Something similar happened last time too, but at least this time it landed.

Yes. They need 1 to land - more than one means too much thrust. Last time they only lit one, it failed to light, and boom. This time they lit all three hoping at least one would work, then turned off the ones they didn’t need. I assume they had the idea independently of the guy who asked musk why they didn’t light more than one and shut down — musk replied “because we’re dumb”, but I guess that tweeter could claim to…

Link to the tweet: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1357256507847561217

Re: Live feed of Starship SN10 flight test [video]

#107

Post by dj_mc_merlin »

bmitc wrote: post #100
dj_mc_merlin wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. One day we will need to leave Earth. Maybe sooner than later. Would you rather have a spacecraft or not when that becomes a need? 2. Many rare materials are common in space. Even if we do not leave Earth, being able to bring those to us would do a great deal. 3. What if we discover life through exploring the cosmos? 4. Nobody settled new lands the first time they sailed the ocean (at least not very successfully).…

> 1. One day we will need to leave Earth. Maybe sooner than later. Would you rather have a spacecraft or not when that becomes a need? I don’t equate visiting another planet or planets with saving the human species. We have vast existential problems, mostly imposed by ourselves, right now on Earth. Let’s say we had a copy of Earth that we could travel to right now in a safe solar system with a healthy star. Is the hu…

> If we simply spread our cancerous way of life throughout the cosmos, I’m not sure I find that exciting.

Unlike you, I do not have much confidence that we will change our ways. Humanity consumes and exploits all that it has met, and will likely continue to do so successfully, or die out. Unless we find more to exploit, the latter seems more likely. Ergo the need for spaceships eventually.

Re: the last two points, they appeal to emotion more so than reason.

Re: Live feed of Starship SN10 flight test [video]

#108

Post by JumpCrisscross »

jonplackett wrote: post #52
lambda_dn wrote: post #30

NASA would have spent 2 trillion and 50 years to get to this stage. SpaceX's rapid iterations and fail fast methodology might save the human species

Reminds me of this story: The ceramics teacher announced on opening day that he was dividing the class into two groups. All those on the left side of the studio, he said, would be graded solely on the quantity of work they produced, all those on the right solely on its quality. His procedure was simple: on the final day of class he would bring in his bathroom scales and weigh the work of the “quantity” group: fifty p…

> on opening day that he was dividing the class into two groups

Possible improvement: the students are simultaneously graded on quality and quantity, where one can tilt heavily in one direction or the other to get a good grade. Students choose their strategy: all in on quantity or quality, or quality leaning towards quantity, et cetera. At the end of the term, the surprise being that the students who leaned towards quantity (maybe number of firings versus mass) produced the most stunning work.

Re: Live feed of Starship SN10 flight test [video]

#109

Post by gildandstain »

chasd00 wrote: post #98
outworlder wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Earth is a single point of failure.

Just want to say “earth is a single point of failure” beneath a schematic of starship would make a great spacex tshirt if it isn’t one already.

"A Pale Blue Point of Failure" if we want to mix Sagan's sense of sublime vulnerability in there

Re: Live feed of Starship SN10 flight test [video]

#110

Post by guerrilla »

lambda_dn wrote: post #30

NASA would have spent 2 trillion and 50 years to get to this stage. SpaceX's rapid iterations and fail fast methodology might save the human species

They did it 1993 and it cost $101 million adjusted for inflation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_DC-X#Flight_...

Post reply on HN