Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s lots of things that are just too big and heavy and need launch vehicles like that. It might be overkill for satellites, but space stations and habitats need the payload capacity of something like this to become anything resembling economical.
how many of those things are there?
Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico
231–240 of 899 posts
Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can someone explain why reentry must be so hellish? The energy gained during the rocket burn into orbit must be bled off during reentry, and that energy is enormous. However, why must reentry occur so quickly? It seems if the descent into the atmosphere was slower, the heat shield would be able to radiate the heat energy away more effectively, thus lowering skin temperatures, and significantly reducing the engineerin…
The velocity of a spacecraft in low earth orbit is over 15,000 miles per hour. Smashing into the atmosphere is perhaps the most fuel- and cost-efficient way to slow down to a speed at which landing is possible.
Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico
#233Incredible! Catching the booster next JIRA ticket.
Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
The vision is that the cost per unit of mass to orbit will come down massively with Starship, once it's launching like the Falcon. That will open up hitherto unimaginable missions and markets. And customers. It's all about the the cost!
Like? What industry really needs things floating in space that are only constrained by cost to launch? I can see lots of science mission perhaps, but even that seems somewhat limited.
Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico
#235I was absolutely certain it wasn't going to make it when I saw chunks breaking off the flap.
Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
Columbus very very much didn't plan to die (though he very much would have if he didn't get lucky that there was a whole new continent there). His plan was to land in India, which he thought he would reach around the time he actually reached the new continent, because he had a completely wrong idea of how large the globe actually was (he alone had this wrong idea; the actual circumference of the globe was pretty well…
Ok great, you’re definitely right, let’s not do it. What now? Will Elon stop? If Elon doesn’t stop, does that make you right?
Of course, building a "city" on Mars is well beyond our capabilities, so that will either not be attempted at all, or it will fail. Maybe by 2124, but more likely 2524.
Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico
#237What the hell, half melted starship actually did the landing flip and hit the ocean slow!!! That was amazing!
The fact that it managed the flip and landing burn means the fuel tanks (i.e. most of the fuselage) must have suffered no burn-through, despite what happened to the front flap. They've obviously got some redesign needed on the thermal protection around the flap hinges, but broadly, the thermal protection system and aerodynamic control during reentry seem to have worked well enough. It's finally starting to feel like…
Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly wondering if that's a Stage 0 issue: those outer engines get primed by the launch ring AFAIK.
oh interesting, i did not know that. Just before ignition there was a bottom up view of what looked like gaseous o2 pouring out, was that the priming? They do that to get the pumps spinning to get pressure to the pre-burners so they can ignite and then get more power to turbo pumps to bring everything up to full power correct?
Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico
#239Watching pieces of the ship melt off, but then seeing it make a relatively controlled landing, is perversely confidence building. If it can survive that kind of damage on a control surface maybe it's a quite robust craft.
Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Landing and then what you plan a flag and die? Pretty much, why do you think columbus set off? And he didn't even know if he'd actually find anything. I don't understand your attitude and people like you, human beings have been explorers forever, and seem to value exploring even over survival potentially. I'd say it's pretty obviously evolutionarily coded into us. Maybe not you, but into many people.
> Pretty much, why do you think columbus set off? And he didn't even know if he'd actually find anything. hahahah Columbus set of because he wanted money, wealth for the crown. not because he was explorer. Columbus, Vasco Da Gama, Cortez et al were not dreamers but entrepreneurs. >> Landing and then what you plan a flag and die? Nobody (within reasonable definition of nobody) wants to go to Everest to die on top. Nob…
For a reasonable chance of being forever immortalized as one of the first humans to step foot on another planet?
Granted, I myself will never get the opportunity so it’s easy for me to say “oh hell yes I’d sign up in a heartbeat”.