4 ms·
The belly flop is also how passenger variants will be landing so you do actually need a reliable program....
by rtkwe 6y ago
The belly flop is also how passenger variants will be landing so you do actually need a reliable program....
- rlt 6y ago...eventually. They didn’t launch humans on the Falcon 9 for the first 10 years either. Lots of time to iron out the kinks (though it will likely be much less than 10 years this time)
- iso947 6y agoHumans aren’t landing propulsively on f9 either - if the landing fails it just costs money. The capsule lands with parachutes.
- throwaway316943 6y agoThe Mars mission has a somewhat tighter timeline.
- DennisP 6y agoAspirationally, yes, but it's not like they run out of money if they don't get to Mars that fast.
- blackrock 6y agoHow many G’s will passenger experience when the ship transitions from the belly flop to the suicide burn? That looks like an awful lot of G’s that this maneuver is pulling there.
- throwaway316943 6y agoI think it would depend on how close they can line up the centre of rotation and the passenger seating.
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y agoThe capsule containing passengers will separate during re-entry and land with parachutes. This suicide burn is just to try to recover the rocket to save money.
- blackrock 6y agoThis is the first I’ve heard of this description of a separate crew module. This sounds even crazier than the bellyflop-swivel-to-suicide-burn (BSTSB). So the Starship system is some type of 3 piece mechanism? Where the 3rd piece is the human module? And they’re going to land this with parachutes? Where? In the ocean? Won’t this kill the reusability of the plan, for quick turn around time? Granted, if the BSTSB is to only be used for transporting inorganic materials, like fuel, then G-forces does not matter for human usage.
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y agoEdit: Disregard this, it's wrong entirely.