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

Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 899 posts

Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico

#201

Post by macintux »

creshal wrote: post #159
rtkwe wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starship might honestly have a similar payload issue with the weird door design, the way it hinges up means you need a more complex release plan than most which just pop straight off the front of the booster. During the third test flight they also tested their weird side eject design for Starlink (or other flat pack style satellites) and the video looks like the door completely ripped itself apart.

The door design isn't final yet, there's no point in whining about it. They need tankers and landers for NASA contracts short term (neither of which require payload deployment), anything else is a nice to have that can be tinkered with on the side until it works.

> The door design isn't final yet, there's no point in whining about it.

Your first clause is correct, the second is unnecessarily hostile.

Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico

#202

Post by zpeti »

simiones wrote: post #173
zpeti wrote: post #161

Earlier 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.

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?

Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico

#203

Post by creshal »

macintux wrote: post #201
creshal wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The door design isn't final yet, there's no point in whining about it. They need tankers and landers for NASA contracts short term (neither of which require payload deployment), anything else is a nice to have that can be tinkered with on the side until it works.

> The door design isn't final yet, there's no point in whining about it. Your first clause is correct, the second is unnecessarily hostile.

I'm just getting really irritated by the amount of concern trolling surrounding SpaceX. Everything they do "must" have a gotcha, because clearly they cannot be as far ahead of the competition as they daily prove to be.

Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico

#204

Post by mhandley »

pixl97 wrote: post #68

What 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 Starship could actually work!

Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico

#205

Post by me_me_me »

zpeti wrote: post #161
me_me_me wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything Mars is pure BS. Just anything and everything. The one way trip to mars is orders of magnitude more complicated than moon. Keeping people from being riddled with cancer in 6months trip is not trivial. Landing and then what you plan a flag and die?

> 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. Nobody wants to dive to Marianas trench to get crush to death.

Who would go to Mars without a way back?

Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico

#206

Post by keyringlight »

simiones wrote: post #173
zpeti wrote: post #161

Earlier 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.

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…

Also when we see a benefit to humans being on another planet, then spend a few missions before sending the mass of robots, prefab materials and equipment so there's habitats ready or nearly ready so we're not confined to whatever we have on one spaceship

Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico

#207

Post by steve1977 »

GJim wrote: post #172
steve1977 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was young, there were no rocket landings.

My grandfather recalls (what he later found out to be) a rocket landing in London's east end during his youth. There were quite a lot of them at the time.

I actually thought about including a “non-destructive” qualifier… ;)

Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico

#208

Post by ceejayoz »

hagbard_c wrote: post #198
ceejayoz wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

George Washington did a lot of important good, while being a slaveowner. Galileo was notorious for being a douche. The world is complex. I'm a huge SpaceX fan, and a big critic of Musk's handling of Twitter. It's OK to hold these opinions simultaneously.

Odd, I think Musk is doing quite well with 'Twitter'. It is a very good thing that the ideological censorship which the Ancienne Regime at Twitter was guilty of has been lifted, especially in the light of the oncoming elections in Europe/the US and the current mess in Brazil etc. It is clear as daylight that those who are ideologically aligned with the previous regime at Twitter are annoyed that their playground has…

> You don't have to like what the opposition says but you should allow them to speak...

Then we're in a agreement that Musk's arbitrary bans (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/04/elon-musk-twitter-st... / https://theintercept.com/2022/11/29/elon-musk-twitter-andy-n...) are bad. I'm glad!

Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico

#209

Post by mywacaday »

bearjaws wrote: post #3

The rate of descent is absolutely astonishing, 8km -> 1km in 20 seconds, then just hovers above the water. Absolutely incredible work by the SpaceX team. Living in central Florida I cannot wait for the new launch facility to come online. We're going to have lines of spectators into the space coast like we did for the shuttle. If any of you are heading to Disney World you should stop by the NASA Kennedy Visitor Comple…

I had the pleasure of seeing Endeavour being brought out on a Crawler-transporter in 2008 from about 300 meters away on the LC 39 Observation Gantry. Its a missed bucket list item that I never got to see one launch. The visitor complex is well worth a visit.

Re: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico

#210

Post by _ph_ »

thegrim33 wrote: post #175
me_me_me wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything Mars is pure BS. Just anything and everything. The one way trip to mars is orders of magnitude more complicated than moon. Keeping people from being riddled with cancer in 6months trip is not trivial. Landing and then what you plan a flag and die?

"Keeping people from being riddled with cancer in 6months trip is not trivial." It's pretty trivial. Put mass in between you and space. It's already been researched to death and we have many years worth of data about the subject.

> It's already been researched to death

Poor choice of words in this context :)

Post reply on HN