Plus Starship I believe has a much more longer re entry / heating phase as well although I could be wrong.
-
If you have been following the news, you should be aware that the people of Lebanon have been under a violent bombardment that has recently escalated. Please consider donating to help them if you can or trying to spread word of the fundraiser.
-
Asheville and Western North Carolina at large are in crisis after Helene, please consider contributing to these local organizations and helping the people whose lives have been destroyed.
SpaceX Starship Test Program
- Thread starter Crispy75
- Start date
- Tech/Gadgets OT
For a test flight of an experimental prototype vehicle, that went just about as perfectly as you could hope.
OP
OP
The main one was coming from the ports where the fueling lines connect, so there must have been a leak there. I believe the other side is a deliberate vent. Inconsequential compared to the rigours of launch and reentry!
Orbit and reentry burn, I'd assume. Probably some in-orbit tests required for the NASA contract.
OP
OP
Flight 6 is already FAA approved, so we should see that pretty soon. Much less time than we waited for flight 5 for sure!
They still haven't relit the Starship engines to demonstrate they can deorbit in a controlled manner, so I would expect that to be the focus of the next flight.
That's going to take a while longer I'd guess, because it's far less immediately mission critical than rapid Booster re-use.
Making sure they can reliably repeat the Booster catch is going to be number one with a bullet for a while.
For Starship I'd guess actual on-orbit operations, with more ocean "landings". Maybe even a moon-shot along with the sort of high-energy re-entry that requires.
Thanks. Hope we won't have to wait long.
I thought they did a test relight in the last flight? Not for entry, but just after they achieved sub orbit.
I think they just didn't stop the engines, they are on all the time.
They officially gave up on using the SLS? I thought Artemis was gonna use the SLS and Orion, did they both get axed?
Ah, they planned a relight for IFT3 and 4 but it was abandoned both times for different conditions. That's what I was thinking of.
They will use SLS to get the astronauts up because it's human rated, they will use a special starship as the lander.
Artemis is to get people to the moon, Starship for landing.
Although presumably Starship will also be used for private moon transport a la Axiom.
Artemis uses SLS and Super Heavy and Falcon Heavy for different launches associated with the mission.
It uses the Orion capsule and "Dragon XL" and Starship to carry crew / cargo.
It's an absolute nightmare of a programme. A real Frankenstein's Monster. Nobody would design a mission like it from scratch, but it's the result of cobbling together various budgets and earlier cancelled programmes to meet goals set by the psychopathic narcissist who was President when it was signed off.
If only Constellation hadn't been axed. At least that program was one thing and had some structure with the Ares family, Altair and all the other bits
They can achieve a pinpoint targeted landing after reentry. The ocean was chosen for safety during the test, but they proved they can land it, softly, where they intended.
it's the space equivalent of when you're learning how to drive, so your instructor takes you to an empty parking lot and you park between some cones - you're not actually parking, you're not putting anyone in any danger, but you're demonstrating that you have the ability to park
doing it this way allows you to identify any problems that you might have (flap placement, heat shield, etc) and test your ability to make a controlled landing. once those problems are all clear, you then feel comfortable bringing it to land and maybe trying to catch it
View: https://x.com/greg16676935420/status/1845455119376077254
View: https://x.com/shaunmmaguire/status/1845444890764644694
Edit: This is also a very good angle. It didn't come close to the tower.
View: https://x.com/dwisecinema/status/1845460397979205787
Last edited:
No SLS and Orion are not cancelled lmao. Where are you getting this stuff?
There's a lot of focus on the Moon and Mars (for good reason) but even without refueling, the amount of cargo to orbit with falcon-like cadence will be a sea change for everything space related. No more 10 year planning for a telescope to shave off 1kg and fit it into a small faring. No more "we can only do this once" because the annual mass to orbit for all projects will skyrocket.
We're on the cusp of something relevatory for near and deep space and it is the most exciting thing we've seen since Apollo, but for everything space related, not just manned spaceflight.
We're on the cusp of something relevatory for near and deep space and it is the most exciting thing we've seen since Apollo, but for everything space related, not just manned spaceflight.
Now if we can just convince congress to actually fund new space telescopes and take advantage of a new launch vehicle.
Using them for Artemis I meant, not the SLS itself or the Orion capsules
Is it likely though? Satellites are certain sizes (albeit based on current launch capabilities) so this seems not optimised for that at all. Maybe suited to a new ISS but the whole thing generally confuses me - massive lift capacity but for what? Planetary bases seems quite a specific thing to bet on.
I agree with you that smaller rockets (and especially Falcon 9) will not be replaced. But there are several things that may well make Starship the better choice:
1. If SpaceX reaches their cost targets then Starship is supposed to _cheaper_ than Falcon 9 to launch. "To big" doesn't matter if the cost is lower.
2. Satellite sizes will grow in size to match the new rocket. Already we know that the Starlink version 2 satellites that SpaceX wishes to launch are to big to fit into a Falcon 9 fairing. Also, if you are not mass constrained you can build satellites using cheaper but bulkier components that will drop your cost enormously. There are companies already planning for the world were large launchers like Starship and New Glenn are available.
3. Ride share exists. SpaceX can put multiple satellites into orbit cheaply if they are going to the same general region. Or alternative put a kick stage on each satellite to get it to it's final orbit.
Some of these have big "ifs" attached so there is nothing guaranteed about them but they are plausible.
I genuinely cannot fathom anyone catching up with them in the next 100 years. No hyperbole at all.
I don't think that matters much. SpaceX is about to dramatically lower the cost of putting things into orbit, we'll start seeing a lot more private companies who will be able to afford launching things into space without government help soon.
So are you saying that eventually they may be able to recover more of the rocket and not just the booster?
Yes, the entire Starship will also be recovered & reusable. There won't be any expended parts. The Starship will also be able to be caught.
Starship is intended to be the landing vehicle for trips to the Moon and Mars.
It will eventually land on legs (much like Falcon 9 does) rather than being caught.
OP
OP