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

SpaceX Loses Starship Spaceraft During Test Flight

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 193 posts

Re: SpaceX Loses Starship Spaceraft During Test Flight

#111

Post by gavinray »

saberience wrote: post #109
gavinray wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what makes the functioning of all the engines so difficult (I know nothing about rockets). How is it that you build something so expensive with so many development resources and expect parts to fail?

I'm going to assume you made this comment in good faith. Most rockets (almost all) use just a few engines. The Saturn V had five engines, and the Space Shuttle had a total of five engines (including the Solid Rocket Boosters). The Atlas V uses one engine, New Glenn seven engines, etc. Historically, there has only been one rocket that attempted the 'many engine' approach before now: the N1 by the Soviets, which they n…

Thanks for the genuine response, it wasn't a troll comment.

Re: SpaceX Loses Starship Spaceraft During Test Flight

#112

Post by AnimalMuppet »

gregjor wrote: post #41

I’m old enough to remember the Apollo program. Not one Saturn V blew up on launch. I guess we had a different notion of “success” back then.

I have personally seen a video of a Saturn (unmanned), launching, that rose maybe half its height off the ground, stopped, descended back down, hit the launchpad, and blew up. That's pretty much "on launch".

But that doesn't seem to have been a Saturn V. What was it? I'm pretty sure it was on Youtube, but a quck search failed to turn it up.

So, maybe "not one Saturn V blew up on launch", but one of the Saturns did.

Re: SpaceX Loses Starship Spaceraft During Test Flight

#113

Post by the_third_wave »

This was mostly a success as far as test flights of experimental rockets go: it left the platform (which remained intact), it cleared the tower, continued on the set course, made it past stage separation and the second stage made it close to orbital speed and as such gave proof of the validity of the concept once the wrinkles have been ironed out.

As predictable the news media - most of which seem to have an antipathy against anything related to Musk, most likely due to ideological differences between their staff and Musk himself - present the launch as "a failure", "a flop", "a disaster", "a fiasco" and more of the like. This goes for nearly all of the ones I sampled ranging from the likes of CNN to places like Sweden's "Dagens Nyheter". As to whether this misrepresentation is due to them not understanding the expectations of test launches like these or in an(other) attempt to tar-and feather another Musk enterprise is unclear but I find it hard to believe that these institutions do not have the facts at hand to honestly report on such tests.

Re: SpaceX Loses Starship Spaceraft During Test Flight

#114

Post by s1artibartfast »

aidos wrote: post #94
s1artibartfast wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They have a production line to build these things. They’ll roll out the next one and try again. Yep. to be more specific, they have 6 more ships built and 5 under construction. Engines are being produced one per day. The scale of manufacturing is stupefying.

One. Per. Day?? That’s pretty wild.

They claim to be able to scale up to 4/day with the current factories. Obviously a bold handwavy claim , but people said that 1/Day.

I have to imagine 350 engines/yr is more than enough for now, even if the FAA has permitted up to 20 launches per year.

Like I said, the whole scale is staggering.

Re: SpaceX Loses Starship Spaceraft During Test Flight

#115

Post by TT-392 »

mkl wrote: post #77
TT-392 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't its nearest competitor be the N1 rocket? That thing did have some liftoffs.

N1 had half the thrust of Starship: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_heavy-lift_launch_vehicl... Nothing else comes close, even planned ones that aren't operational yet.

I didn't say N1 came close to starship, just that it was closer than SLS

Re: SpaceX Loses Starship Spaceraft During Test Flight

#116

Post by Redoubts »

gavinray wrote: post #110
parsimo2010 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s literal rocket science. Liquid fueled rockets have to work in basically the most extreme environments we’ve ever made machines work. Extreme cold temperatures through extreme hot and from extreme high pressures through vacuum. You have to have the best metallurgy and amazing machining tolerances. And then on starship they got it to work more than thirty times simultaneously.

Sure, but if one works, why wouldn't the rest? It's like saying "we built a car engine, but every 33rd car we make the engine doesn't" work. That's not a very good engine. Also, not sure why I am getting downvoted for saying I don't understand something and asking other people how it works.

Could you imagine more problems if you physically strung 33 cars together and tried to drive them in unison?

Re: SpaceX Loses Starship Spaceraft During Test Flight

#117

Post by Dalewyn »

saberience wrote: post #109
gavinray wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what makes the functioning of all the engines so difficult (I know nothing about rockets). How is it that you build something so expensive with so many development resources and expect parts to fail?

I'm going to assume you made this comment in good faith. Most rockets (almost all) use just a few engines. The Saturn V had five engines, and the Space Shuttle had a total of five engines (including the Solid Rocket Boosters). The Atlas V uses one engine, New Glenn seven engines, etc. Historically, there has only been one rocket that attempted the 'many engine' approach before now: the N1 by the Soviets, which they n…

>Space Shuttle had a total of five engines (including the Solid Rocket Boosters).

Very minor nitpick, but the Space Shuttle had seven engines: Two SRBs, three SSMEs, and two OMS engines.

The SRBs and SSMEs were used for launch, and the two OMS engines were used in orbit.

Re: SpaceX Loses Starship Spaceraft During Test Flight

#118

Post by saberience »

Dalewyn wrote: post #117
saberience wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to assume you made this comment in good faith. Most rockets (almost all) use just a few engines. The Saturn V had five engines, and the Space Shuttle had a total of five engines (including the Solid Rocket Boosters). The Atlas V uses one engine, New Glenn seven engines, etc. Historically, there has only been one rocket that attempted the 'many engine' approach before now: the N1 by the Soviets, which they n…

>Space Shuttle had a total of five engines (including the Solid Rocket Boosters). Very minor nitpick, but the Space Shuttle had seven engines: Two SRBs, three SSMEs, and two OMS engines. The SRBs and SSMEs were used for launch, and the two OMS engines were used in orbit.

Yep, you're correct. I was meaning for launch only but I wasn't specific. :)

Re: SpaceX Loses Starship Spaceraft During Test Flight

#120

Post by ralfd »

deadbeeves wrote: post #106
godzillabrennus wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s nice when you have the backing of a super power nation and their blank check to do it vs having shareholders.

Doesn't SpaceX receive plenty of money from the US?

It depends on the definition of plenty. At the peak in 1965 NASA/Apollo funding was 5% of government budget. That would be hundreds of billions today.
Post reply on HN