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

SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

spacenews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 189 posts

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#71

Post by s1artibartfast »

panick21_ wrote: post #48
cookingrobot wrote: post #13

What could prevent them from getting a launch license? What’s the FAA considering in approving or denying a request like this?

The main criteria is if SpaceX can grantee margin of safety in regards to humans. Can they grantee that even in the worst case the rocket isn't gone fly into a town. In this case this is specially hard because the core booster flies back towards the coast.

Do you have any information on the recovery plans for the booster and ship 24?

I have been curious about this and not seen much disclosure on the topic. Would ship 24 also be the largest re-entry vehicle, and largest re-entry vehicle to make ocean landing?

Edit: I was able to find some more information on the splashdown:

>During this time, the spacecraft will hurtle sideways, generating tremendous heat before adjusting to an upright position for a "soft " rocket-powered ocean landing 62 miles north of Kauai. It will sink in the Navy's Pacific Missile Range Facility, according to plans for the historic flight, and join dozens of warships that have gone down over past decades during Navy "sink exercises " in waters 15, 000 feet deep.

https://weatherboy.com/spacex-plans-to-launch-starship-rocke...

https://www.govtech.com/products/orbital-spacex-starship-to-...

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#73

Post by mikewarot »

mlsu wrote: post #57
nonethewiser wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the distinction but I wonder if it’s only useful because of the weird nature of previous rocket engineering efforts. Notably, NASA contracting out different components due to the quirks of being a government entity. SpaceX is much different than that but aren’t they rather similar to, say, car companies? I mean if SpaceX is a rocket factory company, isn’t Ford a car factory company? We just don’t include…

Most definitely! I mean, Ford was revolutionary because it was the first car factory company, right? Before that, you had to have a weird german guy hand build your buggy.

The thing that made Ford revolutionary is precision mass production . You could take parts produced in factories on different continents and freely interchange them. Parts with tolerance of a thousandth of an inch.

Ford bought out Johansson just to make sure he had access to the gage blocks that were the enabling technology of the day.

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#74

Post by FrojoS »

denlekke wrote: post #65
nonethewiser wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the distinction but I wonder if it’s only useful because of the weird nature of previous rocket engineering efforts. Notably, NASA contracting out different components due to the quirks of being a government entity. SpaceX is much different than that but aren’t they rather similar to, say, car companies? I mean if SpaceX is a rocket factory company, isn’t Ford a car factory company? We just don’t include…

yeah i think any company that's more than just a brand name / middle man could say that their production process is their product rather than what they actually sell. spacex does not sell any rocket factories even if that is what they spend the most money on developing so i'd consider them a rocket company because to me a company should probably be described by what brings in the income at some level, even a middle m…

They don’t sell rockets either. They are primarily a launch provider.

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#75

Post by Animats »

rlt wrote: post #58
nonethewiser wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the distinction but I wonder if it’s only useful because of the weird nature of previous rocket engineering efforts. Notably, NASA contracting out different components due to the quirks of being a government entity. SpaceX is much different than that but aren’t they rather similar to, say, car companies? I mean if SpaceX is a rocket factory company, isn’t Ford a car factory company? We just don’t include…

Sure, but for now it seems like a nice succinct way of communicating the difference from the legacy rocket companies.

When there was demand, the "legacy rocket companies" mass produced.

Atlas missile ICBM assembly line, Convair, San Diego, 1950s.[1]

[1] https://live.staticflickr.com/7715/17145288136_e217444837_b....

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#76

Post by lupyro »

hackeraccount wrote: post #51
st_goliath wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you immediately jump to drugs as a conclusion? Maybe they just want to commemorate the birthday of the visionary leader who recognized and funded the genius inventor that ultimately ended up being instrumental in getting the American space program of the ground? /s

Hitler?

Yes, more specifically Hitler funding Wernher von Braun.

I can see both sides of Wernher's fame and criticism but nonetheless people love to point out he was a Nazi.

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#77

Post by s1artibartfast »

bumby wrote: post #17
olliecornelia wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How fucking lame, especially for a company that drug tests.

I assuming they drug test because it's a requirement for govt contracts. Given that they get something like 98% of their funding from the govt, they can't exactly flippantly violate their best customers rules.

Under the Drug-free Workplace Act of 1988, workers at any company that receives a federal contract of $100,000 or more are prohibited from using or distributing drugs in the workplace, and the firm must have a drug-free workplace policy. Elon himself is subject to drug tests by the federal goverment

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#79

Post by rqtwteye »

nonethewiser wrote: post #45
mlsu wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gwynne Shotwell has said that SpaceX is a rocket factory company, not a rocket company. I agree entirely, the possibilities here make me so excited.

I understand the distinction but I wonder if it’s only useful because of the weird nature of previous rocket engineering efforts. Notably, NASA contracting out different components due to the quirks of being a government entity. SpaceX is much different than that but aren’t they rather similar to, say, car companies? I mean if SpaceX is a rocket factory company, isn’t Ford a car factory company? We just don’t include…

"I mean if SpaceX is a rocket factory company, isn’t Ford a car factory company? We just don’t include factory because it’s redundant.

"

I think you could call any company that tries to mass produce something a "X factory company" because from a certain scale on production and supply chains are where the real knowledge is. Apple could be called a "phone factory company".

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#80

Post by detritus »

elif wrote: post #43

I saw on their YouTube channel that they are tentatively targeting 4/20 to light it up :)

ughft. I mean: I smoke hashish, but honestly, Musk's adolescent little references like these are really trite and demeaning to the magnitude of what his companies are hoping to achieve. S3XY, poop emoji and 'Titter'. ughft, just stop already.
Post reply on HN