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

Starship Flight 7

spacex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 772 posts

Re: Starship Flight 7

#121

Post by olex »

inglor_cz wrote: post #97
terramex wrote: post #76

Looks like second stage broke up over Caribbean, videos of the debris (as seen from ground): https://x.com/deankolson87/status/1880026759133032662?t=HdHF... https://x.com/realcamtem/status/1880026604472266800 https://x.com/adavenport354/status/1880026262254809115 Moment of the breakup: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DE52_hVSeQz/

Looks like work of the Flight Termination System. Something measurable had to go very wrong.

While the telemetry was still going, you could see Ship engines going out one by one. Earlier when there was video there was what looked like flames visible inside one of the flap hinges, definitely shouldn't be there on ascent. Presumably something failed internally and caused the Ship to shut down before reaching target trajectory, at which point either FTS or the failure itself caused it to blow up, as seen on the Insta reel.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#122

Post by kklisura »

barbazoo wrote: post #21
paulpauper wrote: post #7

of course, no space x event is complete without the scam fake streams https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1VbZoYSyzA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMG8BbUjwRk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-uQNSxqQHY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PYuUj777a0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqsGPQnAP-M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAC4JzHqRk4

Are these YT channels just mirroring the official one?

They were mirroring Twitter stream and switched to Elon talking about crypto within 10 seconds of the launch. Don't ask me how I know.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#123

Post by pixl97 »

Polizeiposaune wrote: post #109
teractiveodular wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last one is stage separation, not an explosion. You can clearly see the "exploded" rocket continuing to fly afterwards.

No, if that was taken from the Bahamas, that's an explosion connected to the loss of the 2nd stage. Staging happens closer to the Texas coast and I don't believe you'd have line of sight to it from the Bahamas.

I'd say it might be after the loss of the craft. It was losing engines for a while then lost telemetry. This would have been a bit later when it started tumbling in the atmosphere on re-entry. Hopefully we'll know for sure in a few days.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#124

Post by walrus01 »

victorbojica wrote: post #71
wongarsu wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The flight paths are planned specifically so any potential debris has a high chance of landing in the ocean. If it actually exploded (either on its own or because the flight-termination system kicked in) most of it should burn up on reentry though.

What happens if it doesn't explode and they just lost control over it? I'm mostly curios of the risks at that altitude.

the onboard control system and flight termination system are programmed to explode if it deviates from a specific and allowed path of trajectory/speed/functional engine thrust. The last thing anyone wants is a partially broken starship going into an uncontrolled suborbital velocity that lands on a city in Africa.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#125

Post by mardifoufs »

artemonster wrote: post #53

I like how chopsticks catch (a very impressive feat) completely distracts everyone from totally fucked timeline and already spent budget on mars mission. Its like any criticism is being drowned in loud cheers. Only time will tell, but I hope I will be wrong on this one

What's the criticism exactly? Like I don't get your point? Yes they are behind on timelines and on Mars, does that mean that we should post reddit-tier cynical comments every time about that? I'm not saying that you're doing that, it's more that I don't get why this is surprising.

And on the other hand, it's also funny to see how "skeptics" (whatever that means in this case) dismiss or belittle achievements that were claimed to be impossible a few months or years ago (for example, the chopstick landing). It's like a never ending treadmill of

this is impossible->okay it happened, that's cool, but now xyz is impossible.

Plus, it seems normal to me that people care less about some sort of budget details or delays than really cool technical feats.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#126

Post by thepasswordis »

mjevans wrote: post #35

I miss the time before X broke so many things, like official streams being on Twitch where I've already paid for ad free viewing.

Couldn't you make a twitch stream of it? X isn't injecting ads into the video, so just open it on X and stream it to twitch.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#127

Post by walrus01 »

inglor_cz wrote: post #111
victorbojica wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens if it doesn't explode and they just lost control over it? I'm mostly curios of the risks at that altitude.

They have a bunch of explosives strapped on the rocket and can give a radio command to blow the ship up. It can even decide to explode itself if the readings go haywire. It is called the Flight Termination System and it is very common on non-manned flights now.

It could be noted that manually operated flight termination systems have been used even on manned spaceflight, each and every space shuttle flight had a termination system under human ground control.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#128

Post by clueless »

yreg wrote: post #12

When this comment gets 44 minutes old it's going to be T-0.

reminds me of the classic joke: a man walking down a street, stops and asks another person if they know what time it is. The person responds: I'm sorry as I don't have a watch on me, but you see that car parked over there? when it explodes, it should be 5pm

Re: Starship Flight 7

#129

Post by pixl97 »

walrus01 wrote: post #120
teractiveodular wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last one is stage separation, not an explosion. You can clearly see the "exploded" rocket continuing to fly afterwards.

That's for sure not stage separation, that's an explosion from the FTS rupturing the ship tanks.

Eh I'm thinking more it was a reentry explosion from pressurized tanks. Engines had failed a while before then.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#130

Post by ggddv »

jmward01 wrote: post #104

The most important payload for this flight was data. The ship was always going to be lost so from a standpoint of testing this was a huge success! I'm excited to see how quickly they resolve whatever happened and get IFT 8 going.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN