Starship & Booster are continuously improving. When you see that a starship blew up, what’s probably conveniently left off from the headlines you read is its a major revision. New engines, longer, different flaps etc. The last one went up and down wonderfully. The next one launching is v3 and has the latest engines and hundreds of changes and will probably go boom and maybe even the one after that.
They’re literally removing heat tiles from critical areas to see what happens.
In no way is SpaceX messing up here though.
Nobody has ever developed a rocket in the open like this before where stuff breaking is expected and normal.
Edit: Attaching image of their engines for example. That v3 is not a render. This is a brand new engine type (full-flow staged combustion fuel cycle), never flown before SpaceX built one and flew it. Russia built one in theory, but never flew it.
There were failures in the race and they were testing things, but failures weren’t the expected outcomes and part of the planned development cycle. Like they still don’t even know how to make a reusable heat shield which is fundamental to this working.
SpaceX has built a manufacturing line to churn these things out and is like we think this might work, let’s try it in flight hardware. Oh okay that didnt work, let’s try something else. Oh okay that did work now, but if we do this does it still work because if it does we can eek out 2% more performance. Oh shit now we have a brand new mark 2 engine. Does it sill work? Let’s make it longer now with more fuel and new tanks!
Starships blowing up is part of how they are iterating. No one else has done it this way, or so publicly.
The government cant handle things like this because people like you look at it as a failure and shit gets shut down. If they IPO its also going to cause issues for the same reason.
Meanwhile SpaceX has designed, built, flew and landed two orbital boosters before anyone landed one. They fucking caught it in chopsticks.
I’m tired and don’t have the name of the specific parts in my head right now and don’t feel like looking them up. Shit we used to be able to make that is essential to manned spaceflight, that since we decided to get rid of the space shuttle now no longer gets made by anyone. no company nor person has the expertise to simply follow the patents. That’s what trade secrets are for. In short, the supply chain broke and it has not been fixed.
Well, if my google search is right, they’ve already done 15 crewed flights (there/back so 30) with the longest duration in the capsule being over 3 days, and there are people on the ISS, so whatever it is, isn’t needed for any of that manned spaceflight which makes me think its just something that allows for an extended trip, and having a bigger ship, opens the possibilities of other solutions.
For example, they can just take a less complicated but larger CO2 scrubber and/or more oxygen instead of having to use a super complicated one with a material we maybe can’t re-create due to space/weight constraints. They’ll have 100 tonnes to work with. 1 tonne of oxygen would last a small crew for years. Also that 100 tonnes might probably be after life support systems if they’re talking about delivering 100t to surface.
The pic reminds me of a youtuber who debunks SpaceX bullshit almost exclusively. I don’t remember the specifics, but he claimed that the v3 seen here is basically a fantasy.
Seriously, do not trust Musk to build something that works reliably under high stress. Esp. do not entrust human beings to anything Musk builds.
This is looking at the vertical slice head on we see in the original image where we see it as only the vertical part of it. There were other pictures where that 1st one came from with other angles as well, they weren’t hiding anything with a specific shot.
People said it was impossible to propulsive land a orbital booster, and said it would also be impossible to land it on a barge in the ocean.
SpaceX lands a orbital rocket on a barge in the ocean.
People said even if you can reuse a rocket, it’ll never be affordable to do so. One very prominent space person (someone in boeing or something) said, you’d have to fly it 10 times to even be worth making one!
SpaceX flew their first Falcon 9 for the 33th time last week.
People said no ones going to want to use a re-used rocket
SpaceX has people including government agencies specifically looking for used rockets as they’re now flight tested.
People said even if you can relaunch a rocket, there isn’t enough things to put into space to even warrant having one
SpaceX develops Starlink to create a use case for their new rocket.
People said Starlink would never be profitable, you have to keep sending new satellites up they’ll never make money!
SpaceX’s starlink division is now profitable and accounts for more revenue than the rest of the business. (satellites coming down now don’t matter as they can be profitably replenished. All them coming down means is bandwidth capacity will stagnate IF technology doesn’t improve to increase it when more go up)
People thought it was nuts they were going to try and catch Super Heavy booster on 2 chop sticks
SpaceX lands it on their first, and subsequent tries.
The list goes on and on and on and on and on and on, and they keep doing it.
Falcon 9 is the most reliable rocket we have, and you’re sitting here going don’t trust musk to build something reliable lol.
What are tou talking about?
Falcon 9 is fine.
Starship & Booster are continuously improving. When you see that a starship blew up, what’s probably conveniently left off from the headlines you read is its a major revision. New engines, longer, different flaps etc. The last one went up and down wonderfully. The next one launching is v3 and has the latest engines and hundreds of changes and will probably go boom and maybe even the one after that.
They’re literally removing heat tiles from critical areas to see what happens.
In no way is SpaceX messing up here though.
Nobody has ever developed a rocket in the open like this before where stuff breaking is expected and normal.
Edit: Attaching image of their engines for example. That v3 is not a render. This is a brand new engine type (full-flow staged combustion fuel cycle), never flown before SpaceX built one and flew it. Russia built one in theory, but never flew it.
dude, please read up on the space race. we have designed rockets in the open before. they blew up far less frequently.
None of that was like what SpaceX is doing.
There were failures in the race and they were testing things, but failures weren’t the expected outcomes and part of the planned development cycle. Like they still don’t even know how to make a reusable heat shield which is fundamental to this working.
SpaceX has built a manufacturing line to churn these things out and is like we think this might work, let’s try it in flight hardware. Oh okay that didnt work, let’s try something else. Oh okay that did work now, but if we do this does it still work because if it does we can eek out 2% more performance. Oh shit now we have a brand new mark 2 engine. Does it sill work? Let’s make it longer now with more fuel and new tanks!
Starships blowing up is part of how they are iterating. No one else has done it this way, or so publicly.
The government cant handle things like this because people like you look at it as a failure and shit gets shut down. If they IPO its also going to cause issues for the same reason.
Meanwhile SpaceX has designed, built, flew and landed two orbital boosters before anyone landed one. They fucking caught it in chopsticks.
And yet they still can’t do shit we could do 60 years ago
Like deliver 100 tonnes to the moons surface in a single ship?
What do you think they’re failing at so badly compared to 60 years ago.
When does it arrive? Something as spectacular as that they’re probably launching twice a week.
Not as good as my rocket though, it’s powered by Ai and does three laps around the moon powered by bandwidth lazers.
The point is no one has done what they are trying to do. Hur dur NASA got to the moon and SpaceX cant even do it is an apples to oranges comparison.
NASA used a fully expendable system and delivered about 15 tonnes to surface.
SpaceX is building a fully reusable (in theory) first and 2nd stage that can deliver 100t to the surface.
You cant compare it.
Edit: My bad - thats 100t cargo to the moon, actual mass including ship is over 200t. Apollo was still ~15t
wait you’re telling me these dipshits think they are smarter than the square cube rule? that’s hilarious
I’m tired and don’t have the name of the specific parts in my head right now and don’t feel like looking them up. Shit we used to be able to make that is essential to manned spaceflight, that since we decided to get rid of the space shuttle now no longer gets made by anyone. no company nor person has the expertise to simply follow the patents. That’s what trade secrets are for. In short, the supply chain broke and it has not been fixed.
Well, if my google search is right, they’ve already done 15 crewed flights (there/back so 30) with the longest duration in the capsule being over 3 days, and there are people on the ISS, so whatever it is, isn’t needed for any of that manned spaceflight which makes me think its just something that allows for an extended trip, and having a bigger ship, opens the possibilities of other solutions.
For example, they can just take a less complicated but larger CO2 scrubber and/or more oxygen instead of having to use a super complicated one with a material we maybe can’t re-create due to space/weight constraints. They’ll have 100 tonnes to work with. 1 tonne of oxygen would last a small crew for years. Also that 100 tonnes
mightprobably be after life support systems if they’re talking about delivering 100t to surface.I’m tired as well, I’m going to head off to bed.
The pic reminds me of a youtuber who debunks SpaceX bullshit almost exclusively. I don’t remember the specifics, but he claimed that the v3 seen here is basically a fantasy.
Seriously, do not trust Musk to build something that works reliably under high stress. Esp. do not entrust human beings to anything Musk builds.
Ah yes, something that an arm chair rocket scientest says can’t exist
This is it firing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJdu5ee_ohA
This is the clean side of it
This is looking at the vertical slice head on we see in the original image where we see it as only the vertical part of it. There were other pictures where that 1st one came from with other angles as well, they weren’t hiding anything with a specific shot.
People said it was impossible to propulsive land a orbital booster, and said it would also be impossible to land it on a barge in the ocean.
SpaceX lands a orbital rocket on a barge in the ocean.
People said even if you can reuse a rocket, it’ll never be affordable to do so. One very prominent space person (someone in boeing or something) said, you’d have to fly it 10 times to even be worth making one!
SpaceX flew their first Falcon 9 for the 33th time last week.
People said no ones going to want to use a re-used rocket
SpaceX has people including government agencies specifically looking for used rockets as they’re now flight tested.
People said even if you can relaunch a rocket, there isn’t enough things to put into space to even warrant having one
SpaceX develops Starlink to create a use case for their new rocket.
People said Starlink would never be profitable, you have to keep sending new satellites up they’ll never make money!
SpaceX’s starlink division is now profitable and accounts for more revenue than the rest of the business. (satellites coming down now don’t matter as they can be profitably replenished. All them coming down means is bandwidth capacity will stagnate IF technology doesn’t improve to increase it when more go up)
People thought it was nuts they were going to try and catch Super Heavy booster on 2 chop sticks
SpaceX lands it on their first, and subsequent tries.
The list goes on and on and on and on and on and on, and they keep doing it.
Falcon 9 is the most reliable rocket we have, and you’re sitting here going don’t trust musk to build something reliable lol.
Was it thunderf00t by any chance?
Not sure. A middle aged guy (judging from his voice and some hints, I don’t think he’s actually visible) from some English speaking country.
commonsensesceptic ?
Yeah, I think that’s him.