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

Starship Integrated Flight Test 2 at 7 Am Central Time

spacex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 559 posts

Re: Starship Integrated Flight Test 2 at 7 Am Central Time

#241

Post by imetatroll »

Podgajski wrote: post #119
DarmokJalad1701 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were people suffering when Sputnik launched, or when Apollo 11 landed on the moon. It doesn't reduce the magnitude of the event. Sorry for whatever you are going through, though. Hope you get through it.

That was my point, you talk about new eras, but nothing changes. Who is this new for? You, me, or the billionaires who make lives like mine horrible? It’s all spectacle, and where will it all lead? We landed men on the moon, and haven’t been back. What is SpaceX going to use for going to Mars? Are you gonna be the one that’s going or are they gonna leave you behind to rot here on this burning planet?

The kind of scientific advancements needed to sustain on the moon or mars will tremendously improve our abilities to be sustainable here on Earth. You are willfully ignorant or naive.

Re: Starship Integrated Flight Test 2 at 7 Am Central Time

#242

Post by imetatroll »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #174
DarmokJalad1701 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were people suffering when Sputnik launched, or when Apollo 11 landed on the moon. It doesn't reduce the magnitude of the event. Sorry for whatever you are going through, though. Hope you get through it.

The moon landings are historically seen through an almost exclusively middle class, white eye. The "magnitude" was definitely reduced if you were poor and/or black. The "magnitude" of the US Space Shuttle program was definitely reduced for me even as a white kid; I got to watch the shuttle launch on a TV rolled into the classroom, and then go right back to reading my mangled, outdated science textbook, watching my te…

Ow wow. I had no idea space or for that matter science did not exist for non-white people. Fascinating.

Re: Starship Integrated Flight Test 2 at 7 Am Central Time

#243

Post by icegreentea2 »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #219
T-A wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wish we had the spirit of the Apollo Careful what you wish for. The Saturn test program peaked at 3 tests / year (unless you want to count the separately tested launch escape system for the crew capsule), and the fully stacked Saturn V was only tested twice (in 1967 and 1968) before crewed missions. For all its speed, Apollo was not a SpaceX-style rapid iteration program. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Apo…

Tortoise and hare, perhaps. Starship development started in 2012, and now 11 years later has had 2nd launch and failure to reach orbit. Apollo program started in 1961 and had men on the moon in 1969 - with 60's tech.

Measuring Apollo's start point in 1961 can be very misleading. Apollo was the culmination of a more or less continuous development process stretching back to the early 50s with the start of the ICBM programs.

For example, the F-1 engines that powered Saturn V first stage actually began development in the late 50s, with the first static firing happening in 1959. The (in)famous combustion instability challenges of the engine were solved by 1961.

Apollo had a tremendous running start in many areas - to say nothing of having the resources and know-how of the entire US military-aerospace-industrial complex at it's disposal. This isn't to minimize what an accomplishment Apollo was. I just don't think you can meaningfully compare the timelines of what SpaceX is trying to do with Starship, and what Apollo accomplished.

Re: Starship Integrated Flight Test 2 at 7 Am Central Time

#244

Post by imetatroll »

Podgajski wrote: post #158
somenameforme wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rocketry is one of the single hardest things to do right. Their goal is to always go a bit further than last time as, by inches, you approach the goal. And this one went wayyyyy further than the last one. That alone makes it a huge success. Obviously not as big a success as going all the way in one go would have been, but nobody was really expecting that (even if we might secretly have been crossing our fingers anyho…

I get that it’s hard. But there’s no such thing as a “successful failure“. That’s a bullshit marketing term used to keep people hyped up about the project. I wouldn’t mind them cheering if they reach their main goal but I’m pretty sure their main goal wasn’t to have the rocket Blow up on both stages.

You have no idea how technology evolves based on your comments. Frankly it is pretty apparent that you don't care and have a cultish axe to grind.

Re: Starship Integrated Flight Test 2 at 7 Am Central Time

#245

Post by thinkcontext »

ByThyGrace wrote: post #227
cdash wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just want to add another comment in here that there is no manual termination, they are using a fully automatic flight termination system.

Surely the final Starship carrying passengers will not have auto flight termination?

Not sure about that but indications are it won't have an escape system like other manned craft.

Re: Starship Integrated Flight Test 2 at 7 Am Central Time

#246

Post by Kim_Bruning »

ceejayoz wrote: post #217
hackeraccount wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Below orbit is a strange way to put it. Orbit is more speed then height. Google says it was going 1,400 mph when it was lost. Orbital speed is around 17,600 miles per hour. The goal was something just under orbital speed. Not that this wasn't totally amazing. Hopefully the launch pad wasn't damaged and they can crunch the data and have another test that gets further soon.

The readout showed 20k km/hour towards the end. It was definitely near orbital speed. You might be looking at the first stage’s data. Edit: 24,124 km/hr when telemetry stopped on the stream; 15k mph.

A 'k km' is an Mm, so 24 Mm/h , (or 6.67 km/s , if you'd like to go full SI)

Re: Starship Integrated Flight Test 2 at 7 Am Central Time

#247

Post by inglor_cz »

littlestymaar wrote: post #116
BenoitP wrote: post #37

There's a direct media stream that VLC can open (with network stream): https://prod-ec-us-west-2.video.pscp.tv/Transcoding/v1/hls/O... ---- Much better quality, slightly better latency. Seems like it comes from the Periscope transcoding infrastructure. Found it on reddit here: https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/17uyblj/rspacex_int...

404 - NOT FOUND

Well, neither is the rocket.

Re: Starship Integrated Flight Test 2 at 7 Am Central Time

#248

Post by pixl97 »

bandyaboot wrote: post #228
api wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was probably self destructed by the range safety officer if things were going south.

The instantaneous nature of the explosion would certainly be consistent with a self destruct.

With we had another angle of the booster during engine relight. From the SpaceX feed maybe engines didn't start back up? Hard to tell. Could have been leaving the expected flight area maybe?

Re: Starship Integrated Flight Test 2 at 7 Am Central Time

#249

Post by inglor_cz »

thinkcontext wrote: post #245
ByThyGrace wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely the final Starship carrying passengers will not have auto flight termination?

Not sure about that but indications are it won't have an escape system like other manned craft.

Space Shuttle didn't have an escape system either; its total death toll was 14.

Re: Starship Integrated Flight Test 2 at 7 Am Central Time

#250

Post by pixl97 »

dotnet00 wrote: post #127
mechhacker wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wonder if hot staging caused issues with both vehicles or it was two separate issues.

I could believe that hot staging might've affected the booster, since it seemed to blow up right as it tried to light the engines again for boostback. But I don't think the ship would've made it so long if it were seriously damaged by the hotstaging.

Damage to the grid fins mechanism is a potential failure mode here. Even a small amount of damage to the flight control systems could make the procedure uncontrollable and eventually trigger the FTS.
Post reply on HN