So what do you think is going to happen today with SpaceX Starship Flight 13?
(Liftoff scheduled for 6:45 eastern. Polling closes at 6:15)
18
Replies
·
0
Boosts
RE: https://mastodon.online/@mastodonmigration/116976866000775179
SpaceX is going the try to launch their problem plagued really big spaceship again today at 6:45 eastern time.
How to watch and more on this attempt below...
Another Starship Flight 13 Livestream by fanboy Everyday Astronaut
While we wait for this launch attempt listening to all of these space farmers counting their chickens... here is a good piece from Angry Astronaut asking the important question: What if this spacecraft never works?
Thanks for sharing this article. It is quite interesting to consider the points the author is making within the context of the Flight 12 and Flight 13 results. Questions it raises:
- Are the Raptor 3s more fragile? Is this why landing the booster is failing?
- How much weight was actually lifted? How high?
- How fast was it going vs. how fast will it need to slow down from in LEO? Higher orbits?
@mastodonmigration @rvstaveren Speaking to the last question, each Starship test flight so far has ended with it travelling at orbital velocity—just, on a trajectory with perigee below the surface, so that it won't stay in orbit by accident if an engine re-light fails. So it needs to slow down from current test flight speeds only. And higher orbits = slower orbital velocity (counter-intuitively).
Weight: we know it carried 20 Starlink V3 sats, exceeding a Falcon 9's maximum payload.
Interesting. Thanks for those details. Seems like the most positive outcome from yesterday is the ship reentry/landing performance.
@mastodonmigration @rvstaveren Aside from the booster failing to make its landing burn, the test seems to have been a complete success and achieved all objectives. Launch worked, payload deployment worked, on-orbit engine relight worked, re-entry and soft landing of Ship worked.
They need to nail down why some of the first stage engines crapped out during the second re-light, but the next flight is due to be fully orbital and they're going to try and catch Starship with chopsticks on the pad.
Certainly much better, but feel like questions still persist about booster reliability, payload lift capacity, and ship reusability. Orbital engine relight was also very brief and just one engine. But, agree this was a huge step forward.
@mastodonmigration @rvstaveren Relighting *an* engine in free fall was one of the critical requirements before they could place 'ship in orbit—otherwise they'd risk dumping a multi-hundred ton lump of uncontrolled debris in LEO. Now they've ticked that box more ambitious tests are possible.
Also note the stretched fuel tankage compared to v1 and v2. I suspect they've been closing in on their target payload for a couple of iterations now (v1 was apparently overweight. Common with prototypes.)
@cstross @mastodonmigration @rvstaveren dumping a multi-hundred ton lump is probably less troublesome than dumping tens of thousands of one-ton Starlink satellites that will all go uncontrolled in time.
Pretty sure Iran could loft enough nuts and bolts into LEO to do for Starlink's effectiveness pretty rapidly. Wondering if they have started thinking in such terms now that both sides firing on legal commercial shipping is a standard tactic.
@oddhack @mastodonmigration @rvstaveren Starlink sats orbit so looked that they require continuous reboost from an onboard ion rocket or they re-enter within weeks. In the past some lost power: they were gone within a month or two.
@cstross I hope the skies heal
@rvstaveren @mastodonmigration
This [emphasis added]:
> … by going for full-scale testing, he could not only hide the inherent flaws of Starship long enough for the cash to be handed over to him but also put NASA in a position of the sunk cost fallacy. NASA has given SpaceX so much money, and their plans rely so heavily on Starship that they can’t walk away; they might as well keep shoving money at the beast. *This is why Starship, in my opinion, is just one massive con*.
