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

SpaceX's giant Starship Mars rocket nails critical 10th test flight

space.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 363 posts

Re: SpaceX's giant Starship Mars rocket nails critical 10th test flight

#91

Post by stetrain »

moralestapia wrote: post #62
Romario77 wrote: post #18

It was a significant progress, but I won't call it "nailed it". As there was an damage or explosion on re-entry where the skirt of the starship got damaged. And we could see pretty significant damage on one of the fins. Nailing it would be without the things above.

This guy ... MEGA lmao. To the contrary, I am fascinated by what SpaceX has accomplished so far. I wouldn't just say they "nailed it" they completely blew past all expectations I had. "Why didn't just get it right on their first test", really? People can't even get a regex right the first time. Are you aware of the size of this rocket? That it reached orbit? That it hovered over the ocean instead of just crashing int…

> "Why didn't just get it right on their first test", really? People can't even get a regex right the first time.

The comment you replied to didn't say that. And this isn't the first test.

I think their comment was reasonable. It was a successful mission that met the stated objectives and demonstrated progress. But it wasn't perfect, and there is definitely more progress to be made for Starship to be a reliable operational launch system.

Re: SpaceX's giant Starship Mars rocket nails critical 10th test flight

#92

Post by grapesodaaaaa »

kilroy123 wrote: post #57
seatac76 wrote: post #13

Amazing achievement. Just watching no that giant thing lift off is a great feeling.

It's pretty remarkable progress. Slowly but surely, they're getting it done. I predict they'll have a full working version by 2027. By 2028, they'll have regular reusable flights.

My personal estimates are similar. For anyone that followed Falcon 9 development (from the first Falcon 1 launches), it’s really similar. I remember boom after boom until one day they cracked the problem and reusable boosters became the status quo.

I got tingles when the first booster landed on the drone ship, because I knew access to space had just changed in a fundamental way.

Re: SpaceX's giant Starship Mars rocket nails critical 10th test flight

#93

Post by ajmurmann »

fluoridation wrote: post #27
thatoneguy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that matter? It's doing a thing already done nearly 70 years ago but at its own pace. I bet it will get to the moon cheaper, too, and the Muskonauts will use less expensive lenses than Hasselblads to take photos.

Starship isn't exactly the same as Saturn V. It's bigger, for one. The reason why it matters is that efficiency matters. It's fine if it takes longer, not so much if it costs way, way more, especially if such a huge rocket has limited applications. And as I understand it the consensus is that Starship (or at least a fully-loaded Starship) will never go to the Moon. Once it's in orbit it takes like twenty refueling la…

"It's fine if it takes longer, not so much if it costs way, way more, especially if such a huge rocket has limited applications."

Taking longer at lower cost is a great trade-off for Starship but wasn't for Saturn V. The main driver for Saturn V was the space race against the Soviet Union. Economic interests played a very small role. It was all about being first and compensating for the Sputnik shock.

Re: SpaceX's giant Starship Mars rocket nails critical 10th test flight

#94

Post by stetrain »

fluoridation wrote: post #47
stetrain wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that understanding of the consensus is incorrect. The mission plan for Artemis 3 is that a specialized Starship upper stage will be refueled in LEO and then transfer to lunar orbit where it will wait for astronauts arriving on SLS/Orion. Yes the mission profile is more complex, but that complexity can mostly be settled before the astronauts launch on their mission. NASA seems to think it is a viable plan whic…

Wikipedia: > After a multi-phase design effort, on April 16, 2021, NASA selected SpaceX to develop Starship HLS and deliver it to near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO) prior to arrival of the crew for use on the Artemis III mission. The delivery requires that Starship HLS be refueled in Earth orbit before boosting to the NRHO, and this refueling requires a pre-positioned propellant depot in Earth orbit that is filled by…

> I stand by what I said: not happening. I'll believe it when I see it.

And it's totally valid for you to have that opinion. But it's your opinion, not "the consensus."

Re: SpaceX's giant Starship Mars rocket nails critical 10th test flight

#95

Post by DrBazza »

ekianjo wrote: post #43
criddell wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it's a similar size to the Saturn V, but something about the Saturn V just seems grander to me. Maybe it's the paint job? Frankly, it kind of blows my mind what the US pulled off in the late 60's, early 70's with the technology and materials of the time.

They had virtually infinite budget at the time. SpaceX is much, much cheaper.

Whenever we talk about space flight, this movie quote comes to mind: "You know we're sitting on four million pounds of fuel, one nuclear weapon and a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder."

Starship has considerably fewer moving parts. And googling 'evolution of raptor engines' gives you some pretty stark images on how simpler things look, in principle.

Re: SpaceX's giant Starship Mars rocket nails critical 10th test flight

#96

Post by stronglikedan »

Romario77 wrote: post #18

It was a significant progress, but I won't call it "nailed it". As there was an damage or explosion on re-entry where the skirt of the starship got damaged. And we could see pretty significant damage on one of the fins. Nailing it would be without the things above.

Nah, they nailed it.

Re: SpaceX's giant Starship Mars rocket nails critical 10th test flight

#97

Post by baq »

gtirloni wrote: post #80
GeekyBear wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very common for extremely hot metal pressure tanks to rupture when plunged into water.

I understand but I'm asking more from a process perspective. If these are planned.

In complex systems testing by perturbing the environment is the easiest, simplest and uncovers most relevant issues with design. They knew something would fail, but not necessarily what exactly or in which sequence. They can now reject or accept their hypotheses and improve their models.

Re: SpaceX's giant Starship Mars rocket nails critical 10th test flight

#98

Post by DrBazza »

fhd2 wrote: post #54
ekianjo wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They had virtually infinite budget at the time. SpaceX is much, much cheaper.

Is it though? I'm not knowledgeable on this at all, but it _seems_ like Space X is blowing up a lot more expensive equipment compared to NASA back in the space race days. Genuinely curious how it compares and how true my outsider impression is.

There's more of a production line when building Starships, with modern mechanised tooling - much of it computerised and 100% repeatable. There's been at least 10 so far, vs only 15 Saturn V, 3 of which were ground tested.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_V

Re: SpaceX's giant Starship Mars rocket nails critical 10th test flight

#99

Post by magicalhippo »

criddell wrote: post #36
seatac76 wrote: post #13

Amazing achievement. Just watching no that giant thing lift off is a great feeling.

I know it's a similar size to the Saturn V, but something about the Saturn V just seems grander to me. Maybe it's the paint job? Frankly, it kind of blows my mind what the US pulled off in the late 60's, early 70's with the technology and materials of the time.

I too find it difficult to appreciate the scale of the thing. The lack of features doesn't help I think.

That said, I hadn't fully appreciated the size of Saturn V either until I saw it in person in the museum. Like, I had felt it was big, but it was big.

Post reply on HN