SpaceX’s Starship rocket system reached several milestones in its second test flight before the rocket booster and spacecraft exploded over the Gulf of Mexico.

  • Pennomi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Falcon 9 is the most reliable rocket in the world and it used to explode like this too. It’ll be 5-10 years of successful unmanned flights before anyone rides on this rocket.

      • kobra@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        You literally said you were concerned for manned flight in your last comment. So originally it was the rocket and engineering you were concerned about.

        • Buffaloaf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I said I was concerned because of the corner cutting, which isn't an engineering problem

          • kobra@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That might’ve been what you intended but it is not what you said. You didn’t bring that up until your 2nd comment.

        • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          You literally said you were concerned for manned flight in your last comment

          You're oh so slightly twisting the dude's words. What he said was:

          Which is why I'm nervous for when they decide to start doing manned flights.

          This could be expressing concern about the flights themselves, or about something that happens around the time the decision to start doing manned flights is taken - like cutting corners that leads to employees getting injured.

          Dude even clarified what he meant, and you're like "nope, I won't accept that"?

    • Neato@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Was NASA exploding rockets this frequently when they pioneered all of this decades ago? It only took NASA 8 years to go from first entering space to landing on the moon. SpaceX is nowhere close to that and they've been launching rockets for 17 years.

        • Neato@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Damn you clearly know nothing about technological development. Elon stands on the shoulders of all those who gave their lives in the past. He benefits from all the safety regulations.

          And still with all of that. The tens of billions of dollars the government hands out to him. And more than twice the time of the Space Race he had accomplished so little. How many successful rockets did NASA develop in that time? A lot more than SpaceX.

      • QuinceDaPence@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Different design processes and NASA has to appease Congress who likes to cut funding if a rocket blows up.

        But the Design-build-test-break-redesign-etc process that SpaceX uses is cheaper, quicker, and gives more data.

      • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It took 8 Years AND $25 billions ($248 billions adjusted to today's dollar value).

        For comparison NASA awarded a contract for spacex to develop the Human Landing System, the value of the contract is $2.89 billions.

      • porkins@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exploding rockets is totally common in rocket science. In fact, their mission objective wasn’t even for the rocket to succeed at making it to space. When you put millions of pounds of fuel into a tube and heat it up, there is a lot to take into account. No one has ever launched anything this big, so they are going to have to iterate quite a few times. Even the computer models can’t catch everything. Sometimes it is as stupid as a bad part manufacturer.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, but the resources given and the requirements set are different. The Saturn V did not have to be reusable and was awarded two orders of magnitude more funding. Which is ultimately why it stopped being made.