So I’ve heard and seen the newest launch, and I thought for a private firm it seemed cool they were able to do it on their own, but I’m scratching my head that people are gushing about this as some hail mary.

I get the engineering required is staggering when it comes to these rocket tests, but NASA and other big space agencies have already done rocket tests and exploring bits of the moon which still astounds me to this day.

Is it because it’s not a multi billion government institution? When I tell colleagues about NASA doing stuff like this yeaaaars ago they’re like “Yea yea but this is different it’s crazy bro”

Can anyone help me understand? Any SpaceX or Tesla fans here?

  • Zer0_F0x@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    168
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Disclaimer: Fuck Elon Musk and all the shady shit he’s been pulling off.

    That said, this is one of the most impressive things I’ve ever seen in terms of the potential it holds to shape the future.

    Up until 5 short years ago we had:

    • No main booster recovery
    • No rocket nearly as powerful as this one
    • No successful flight of a full-flow stage engine
    • Nobody even considering the catch with chopsticks thing
    • No private company testing super heavy lift vehicles (BO is about to enter the chat as well)
    • No push for reusability at all

    This was all built on top of the incredible engineering of NASA, but this one launch today has all of the above ticked.

    This is like making the first aeroplane that’s able to land and be flown again. SpaceX uses this example as well, like, imagine how expensive any plane ticket would have to be if you had to build a brand new A380 every single time people wanted to fly and then crashing it into the sea.

    Going to space is EXPENSIVE. If this program succeeds it will both massively reduce the cost to space and spin off hundreds of companies looking to do the same in various ways.

    Look at any new rocket currently in development, they all include some level of reusability in the design and that’s all thanks to the incredible engineers of SpaceX paving the way, first with Falcon 9 and now with Starship.

    We’re talking industrial revolution levels of progress and new frontiers in our lifetimes, which is very, very exciting.

    • Ludrol@szmer.info
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      A bit of a timeline correction. The falcon 9 started landing succesfully in 2016. So 8 years ago but your argument still stands.

    • WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 months ago

      no rocket as powerful as this one.

      So I’m confused on this because people still seem to be using Starships’s old estimates of 100 tons to LEO orbit, which the SLS can put 145 tons to LEO.

      Then 6 months ago Musk got on stage and updated the specs to Say that Starships’s current design can only do 40-50 tons.

      This feels awfully familiar for anyone that’s seen early Tesla specs/presentations/promises and I can’t help but wonder as to the validity of everyone saying SpaceX is mostly insulated from Musk’s “influence.”

      • Vlixz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        2 months ago

        To be very honest even if Starship is able to only lift 50 tons, which I’m sure they’ll be able to hit 100/150 tons eventually. The huge difference in cost would easily cover the extra times Starship would have to fly, compared to SLS. Considering each flight of a SLS will be around 4 billion dollars.

      • hobovision@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think they mean the “superheavy” (somehow a more stupid name than starship) booster rocket is the most powerful. I’m pretty sure by thrust metrics it is. It’s just that the superheavy-starship system can’t put much up in LEO because the starship is huge and heavy on its own.

        If you put an expendable second stage on top of the superheavy booster instead of a starship it could put a lot more up to LEO.

    • Flipper@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      The Saturn 5 was able to lift 141t to LEO.

      The Space shuttle was reusable.

      • Zer0_F0x@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        The Saturn V could lift 141t to LEO…once. Also it’ll be at least another 5 years before we reach a stable max power version of Starship.

        For example the Falcon 9 v1.0 first flew in 2010 and the current Block 5 version first flew in 2018 with more than double the LEO capacity when fully expendable.

        If they configure Starship as fully expendable it can lift 250t to LEO (per SpaceX, so grain of salt there to be fair).

        As for the shuttle, I love it to bits and I’m sad it had to be grounded. It was refurbishable but not really reusable and the massive liquid fuel tank was discarded in each flight.