- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: SpaceX Starship Flight Test 3 | B10 crashes in Gulf, S28 burns up during reentry
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:14 pm to jcaz
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:14 pm to jcaz
quote:
Let SpaceX cook and build your little model rockets.
Take all the digs you want, but aside from the scale of the vehicles and their complexity (which I will concede are many, many orders of magnitudes higher), the troubleshooting processes remain the same. We just have less variables to look at when things go wrong...
1
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:18 pm to Puddenn32
quote:
how are they going to account for and understand how heat shields are going to work?
Scale models. You can reproduce the conditions (temperatures and velocities) that a re-entry vehicle will experience on a smaller scaler. With today's computing power it should be relatively easy to scale up to full size.
But my guess it the problem today wasn't hardware related, it was software related...
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:23 pm to Lonnie Utah
And I'm not saying SpaceX isn't' doing amazing things for a private company. Far from it. They have achieved more than many nations when it comes to space flight and exploration.
My critique comes from, based my limited knowledge of the process, it appears their engineering processes have some apparent flaws (with catastrophic failures nearly every flight). Let me pose this question. If SpaceX was run by the government and not a private individual/corporation would you still be as nonchalant with how their progress is going?
My critique comes from, based my limited knowledge of the process, it appears their engineering processes have some apparent flaws (with catastrophic failures nearly every flight). Let me pose this question. If SpaceX was run by the government and not a private individual/corporation would you still be as nonchalant with how their progress is going?
This post was edited on 3/14/24 at 12:24 pm
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:24 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
By ground testing instead of flight testing. Ever been to Huntsville, Alabama?
So you’re under the impression that SpaceX has done absolutely zero ground testing ever…..
And you know we still test flew rockets back in the Huntsville days, right? We didn’t just strap astronauts onto the top the first time they attempted to make those things go vertical.
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:24 pm to Lonnie Utah
Your rockets are made of plastic and paper. Just stop dude
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:25 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Scale models. You can reproduce the conditions (temperatures and velocities) that a re-entry vehicle will experience on a smaller scaler. With today's computing power it should be relatively easy to scale up to full size.
So you’re absolutely positive that SpaceX does zero testing other than what you saw today.
This post was edited on 3/14/24 at 12:26 pm
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:25 pm to pankReb
quote:
So you’re under the impression that SpaceX has done absolutely zero ground testing ever…..
No, but they could obviously do more.
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:26 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Lonnie Utah
Apply to SpaceX bud and tell Elon how you feel
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:29 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
No, but they could obviously do more.
What test should they have done that would have prevented the failures of today?
Are you aware that NASA’s had rockets blow up for decades?
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:30 pm to jcaz
quote:
Your rockets are made of plastic and paper. Just stop dude
Totes the same.
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:31 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
By ground testing instead of flight testing. Ever been to Huntsville, Alabama?
That's the point of using stainless steel with an assembly line engine production facility. Build them relatively cheaply so you iterate on the fly and drastically cut down time to operational capability compared to NASA.
The weak point is probably thermal tiling, which is something Stoke Space is doing away brilliantly with their propellant cooled heat shield.
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:32 pm to pankReb
quote:
What test should they have done that would have prevented the failures of today?
I get your line of questioning here, but obviously I can't comment because I don't know exactly what failed or how.
And I get the point many of you are trying to make. Sometimes the only way to find things out is under real world conditions. But that doesn't invalidate the my observation that the SpaceX's success rate, based upon vehicles surviving launch and reentry, isn't great right now.
This post was edited on 3/14/24 at 12:35 pm
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:33 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
My critique comes from that, from my limited knowledge of the process, it appears their engineering processes have some apparent flaws (with catastrophic failures nearly every flight).
Found the guy working on the Artemis program.
Musk’s “process” is to push the vehicles to failure, and then improve upon those. It’s much quicker and cheaper than trying to model every possible scenario and “design out” the failure. Examples of this are the Falcon program and Dragon capsule. Once Starship is flight approved it will put the SLS into the garbage heap, and will fly at a fraction of the cost. Honestly, SLS isn’t any better than Falcon Heavy if you look at them on a lift capacity/$ basis.
He doesn’t have people investing billions in SpaceX if it were a money loser.
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:35 pm to Free888
quote:
Found the guy working on the Artemis program.
Funny that you say that, because I do know multiple people working on that program...
And to be fair, that program is not without it's criticism either...
This post was edited on 3/14/24 at 12:36 pm
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:39 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
No, but they could obviously do more.
You should tell Elon this. Obviously he is unaware and needs to know that he doesn't have to wing it with every launch.
"So, Elon, to what to you contribute the remarkable turnaround and success of your Starship program?"
"Well, after a few unsuccessful - by media outlets standards - launches, this guy who builds and flies model rockets called me up and told me to start testing before attempting launches. Changed literally everything."
This post was edited on 3/14/24 at 12:51 pm
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:50 pm to crazyLSUstudent
i bet spacex is out right now raising a billy or two based on today's launch
Posted on 3/14/24 at 1:06 pm to CheesyF
I'm still in awe of the live video from the Starship's exterior of the fires of reentry
That's wild and should go up as 1 of the greatest space images ever taken
That's wild and should go up as 1 of the greatest space images ever taken
This post was edited on 3/14/24 at 1:08 pm
Posted on 3/14/24 at 1:33 pm to rt3
So we did actually see B10 slam 1119km/h into the Gulf
This post was edited on 3/14/24 at 1:34 pm
Posted on 3/14/24 at 1:47 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
I'm just saying that the model of not having rockets survive test flights isn't sustainable even if you're getting "good data" back from them.
It's research and development costs. And they have a MASSIVE budget for that... a good chunk of which is provided by NASA.
Yes, like any budget, there is a limit, and at some point, this thing needs to have a successful flight, but I don't think we are at that point of concern yet.
It's an absolutely massive investment with an equally or greater massive return if it works. And it's certainly trending in the right direction.
Posted on 3/14/24 at 1:49 pm to Lsuhoohoo
quote:
but I feel like it would be so deflating losing a ship after everything that went into.
In the absolute best case scenerio, the ship was crashing into the Indian Ocean never to be seen again.
The difference between hitting the ocean as designed and breaking up when it did is 10-15 minutes of data. It would have been vauable data, but that's all it is.
Page 11 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News