13 ms·
Live feed of Starship SN15 flight test [video]
- medium_burrito 5y agoThey need to paint Bezos' face on the side of it and launch it again!
- dawnerd 5y agoHeck just buy a bunch of doge, paint the rocket with the dog, launch it and sell all the profits when it spikes from the memes.
- inglor_cz 5y agoThe landing was really smooth this time. Very graceful. It seems some progress is being done.
- tigershark 5y agoThey used the new generation green raptors for SN15.
- IvoBG 5y agoman I am going of this planet
- bpodgursky 5y agoLame. I came for explosions and shrapnel, and all I got was a viable POC of cheap interplanetary flight.
- loganwedwards 5y agoThis comment made my day. Looking forward to Starship flights to be as routine as the Falcons.
- fighterpilot 5y agoDownvotes from all the negative people hoping this would fail
- jiofih 5y agoI guess they might be downvoted because of “lame” which is now considered ableist.
- fallingfrog 5y agoMeh, probably it happened because of lazy readers who just scan the first 3 or 4 words and then downvote- the joke most likely soared miles above their heads. This is why downvotes should cost karma.
- CarVac 5y agoBreaking news! Most boring Starship flight ever!
- KptMarchewa 5y agoYou were looking for this video: https://youtu.be/bvim4rsNHkQ https://youtu.be/bvim4rsNHkQ
- whatshisface 5y ago>Shortly after the landing burn started, SN11 experienced a rapid unscheduled disassembly. Teams will continue to review data and work toward our next flight test. I wonder how many failures SpaceX can fund before the project ends up in trouble.
- foota 5y agoIt's my impression they're printing money, so probably a whole lot.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- tedsanders 5y agoThat impression is incorrect. SpaceX raised ~$2B in August and ~$1B in February [1]. The company is very cashflow negative (operationally), as growing companies typically are. [1] https://spacenews.com/spacex-adds-to-latest-funding-round/ https://spacenews.com/spacex-adds-to-latest-funding-round/
- jiofih 5y agoThey are also funding StarLink + the moon landing program. Better to pile cheap money up while investors are knocking at their doors.
- walrus01 5y agoReportedly they turned down many more investors than they accepted in the recent funding round, because they wanted a great proportion of the shares available vs. the funds that were offered. They could have raised way more than $2B + $1B if they'd been willing to go for further dilution. Musk has been quite open about how starlink will need to go through a deep trough of low revenues and high expenses, before it can become self sustaining from the monthly subscription revenue of millions of customers.
- KptMarchewa 5y ago
- jffry 5y agoThat's a standing, upright rocket, which is pretty cool! More camera angles (unofficial): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPNvB5ComFw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPNvB5ComFw Looks like whatever the small fire was after the landing has been contained.
- guardiangod 5y agoIn the previous tests Spacex used 2-3 rocket engines for the initial landing burn. For SN15, the rocket used 2 engines throughout the landing procedure. I wonder if this is a sign of their confidence in the improved design. The landing was smooth as butter and nothing went noticeably wrong, although I did noticed that the rocket landed dangerous close to the edge of the concrete pad.
- pantalaimon 5y agoThere was also quite a bit of fire after the landing, but this time the rocket would not explode from it.
- Pfhreak 5y agoFire and a few pops/pings/small explosions in the engine area, but didn't appear to destabilize the rocket, which is a good sign.
- olex 5y agoSN10 blew up from the post-landing fire, because it landed hard, collapsing the landing legs, skirt and damaging/destroying the engine bells and more stuff around them - possibly the thrust bulkhead and bottom of methane tank, leading to significant leaks and eventual explosion. SN15 seems to have landed intact on fully extended landing legs, so the hardware inside the skirt likely survived, and whatever caused the fire was a (relatively) minor leak and not catastrophic.
- chasd00 5y agoMan did you notice how close on of the legs came to missing the concrete pad and ending up in the dirt? It looked like just a couple feet to me. It would have probably tipped over.
- Diederich 5y agoIt slid sideways about a meter on the pad. I believe yesterday had the highest winds in any of their Starship launches.
- d_silin 5y ago...has landed!
- rbanffy 5y agoAnd no big fireball.
- ArtWomb 5y agoCongrats! Looks like they stuck the landing. Marks the 60th anniversary of first American in space: Alan Shepard's Mercury-Redstone 3 mission ;) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury-Redstone_3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury-Redstone_3
- jcims 5y agoAlso apparently SpaceX’s 21st birthday.
- Denvercoder9 5y ago19th, it was founded in 2002.
- tjtrapp 5y agoHappy anniversary! Wanna work with us? Check out this role on my team - aerospace experience is not required: https://grnh.se/25a344122us https://grnh.se/25a344122us If that's not your flavor, we have others: https://www.spacex.com/careers/index.html?department=Software%2520Development https://www.spacex.com/careers/index.html?department=Softwar...
- fasteddie31003 5y agoLet's launch it again!
- d_silin 5y agoNow the next step is high suborbital flight and then real orbital test.
- bpodgursky 5y agoIIRC they don't plan on an orbital test of the standalone second-stage. They'll strap it to a superheavy first.
- d_silin 5y agoYes, you are right. But 100km altitude or so suborbital test is definitely possible with SN prototype alone.
- bob33212 5y agoYes, but 100km isn't very valuable as compared to 10km. Pressure is already low at 10km.
- handol 5y agoThe difference would be supersonic/hypersonic flight during the fall.
- gizmo385 5y agoHonest question: is it possible that the rocket could already be hitting terminal velocity when falling from 10km?
- handol 5y agoYes, it gets to terminal velocity pretty quickly, it's decelerating for most of the fall as the atmosphere gets denser. Estimated kinematics from a prior flight. https://flightclub.io/result/2d?code=SN91 https://flightclub.io/result/2d?code=SN91 edit: To clarify, a drop from 100km would not hit terminal velocity quickly, it would accelerate until it got to the thicker lower atmosphere where it would be rapidly slowed.
- Aeolun 5y agoIt didn’t explode!
- daedalus2027 5y agoAt 11:08 you can see udp://234.70.253.161:9000
- walrus01 5y agoIANA reserved multicast space, often used in peoples' internal networks, not something you could ever access unless you were connected to the same network segment as the video stream source.
- regnerba 5y agoToday I learned, thanks for sharing that info!
- nassimosaz 5y agoThanks a lot! I was almost about to spend couple hours analyzing the ip and ports. Now I know that it’s a reserved multicast ip.
- ttflee 5y agoThis means the actual IP range should be something in 70.252.0.0/14, which is assigned to AT&T according to whois.arin.net. Chopping off 234 from head of this IP address, the parts left are the network address and group id. See: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6034 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6034
- skeletonjelly 5y agoPeople have managed to tune into the raw video stream via RTL-SDR. I'm guessing this IP is post this step and internal to their streaming https://www.rtl-sdr.com/receiving-space-x-falcon-9-telemetry-with-a-hackrf-and-1-2m-satellite-dish/ https://www.rtl-sdr.com/receiving-space-x-falcon-9-telemetry... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26423406 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26423406
- walrus01 5y agoThe font used in the IP address almost looks like something generated as an overlay by VLC or ffmpeg.
- Laremere 5y ago"Starship landing nominal!" - @elonmusk https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1390073153347592192 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1390073153347592192
- raphaelj 5y agoAny idea why they shutdown some engines during ascent? Seems efficient as you are fighting gravity with less acceleration and more dead weight.
- hiharryhere 5y agoThey’re not trying to go fast. They’re trying to get to the target altitude to test the flip. No need to rush or overshoot. In “production” it will be atop the booster, so taking off like this from sea level isn’t part of the plan.
- nickik 5y agoThey don't want to go to high or to fast. So they start out pretty heavy and as the fuel is consumed they turn of engines in order keep the TWR the same. They don't want to test supersonic flight profiles with this vehicle. This flight profile is not at all optimized for fuel use.
- oconnor663 5y ago> This flight profile is not at all optimized for fuel use. I suppose you could say it's optimized to use almost all the fuel :)
- NobodyNada 5y agoEach Raptor engine cannot throttle down below about 40% of its maximum thrust [0], so they must completely shut down some of the engines in order to achieve the lower required thrust for hovering or landing. [0]: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1295553672454311941 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1295553672454311941
- adgjlsfhk1 5y agoIt is less efficient. That said, they aren't carrying a payload and they don't have to run it full on fuel, so it doesn't matter. More importantly, they care about testing the landing which requires them to be a certain horizontal distance from the landing site, so it's easier to do that by hovering sideways so they don't get way too much height.
- IvoBG 5y agoMan I'm going of this planet :)
- jiofih 5y agoA question for those in the know: since the landing payload is much lighter, wouldn’t it be possible to use SuperDraco engines (the ones used for emergency escape in the Dragon) attached to the outside to prevent RUD in case the main engines don’t light up?
- walrus01 5y agoI am no expert on these things but I think the starship has no tanks or system for the different, hypergolic fuels used for the superdraco and similar type of thrusters. "SuperDraco engines use a storable propellant mixture of monomethylhydrazine fuel and dinitrogen tetroxide oxidizer"
- rbanffy 5y agoHypergolics are very toxic, corrosive and made of the most exquisite molecules of the purest evil. Dealing with them is expensive and complicated and drives cost up. It was one of the reasons why shuttles were so expensive to refly.
- ncmncm 5y agoThe new hypergolic fuel everybody is actively working on switching to is not (especially) toxic or corrosive. And has better specific impulse. Existing Dragons might never be switched over, because flight-qualifying a crewed vehicle over again is expensive. If they build any new Dragons, it would not be surprising if they still use the old fuel. But anything in design today will use the new fuel, because it's enough better.
- CarVac 5y agoAre you thinking of the new viscous liquid monopropellants that replace hydrazine monopropellant, rather than hypergols? Hypergols are always highly reactive, by very nature of being hypergolic.
- codeulike 5y ago
- paulpauper 5y agomore $ for spammers and scammers impersonating elon musk or spacex. Scammers have made tens of millions of dollars from elon musk and crpyto scams since 2018..$30k a day easily per scammer. He is the greatest gift to scammers ever. Selling phony pills or casinos is a bigger industry but margins much thinner and more overhead.
- jiofih 5y agowhat exactly is his part in Twitter scams other than promoting crypto itself?
- tjpnz 5y agoI think they're referring to the fake YouTube livestreams crypto scammers run hoping to attract people wanting a legit stream. This is a problem but it's all on YouTube/Google.
- valine 5y agoThis post is about the first successful landing of SpaceX's Starship. What does that have anything to do with crypto.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- nine_k 5y agoInterestingly, the video feed gets corrupted around 11th minute, and neither YouTube under Linux/Firefox, nor VLC, nor mpv can play it: the picture freezes, and error diagnostics are printed. Youtube player under Windows / Firefox does play it through, forcing its way past some garbage frames with noise and rainbow artifacts.
- floatingatoll 5y agoIf you got a snapshot of that corrupted file, I know at least the VLC and Firefox projects would appreciate the bug report, since "freeze + error" is often a short step away from "buffer overflow" — and simply alone the fact that you captured a bytestream under real world circumstances that crashed their players, and have that bytestream for the bug report, is always of maximum interest with such things.
- nine_k 5y agoA great idea; will do.
- Denvercoder9 5y agoWhich video feed? The YouTube stream linked in the submission plays fine under all three players you mentioned for me. SpaceX did have issues with freezing picture around that mark, but that's all on their end (note the clock keeps ticking).
- bostonsre 5y agoYea, would guess transmission issues from the rocket to the ground and the clock is added on the ground somewhere. I wouldn't expect the clouds to interfere if the transmission went up to space then back down (would expect them to do something like that at some point). But maybe microwave from ground to rocket could have had clouds interfere with the signal?
- walrus01 5y agoDownloading it via youtube-dl for the highest quality version also results in a file that at first glance has many freezes in the video stream, when played in VLC. But I think there's nothing wrong with the youtube stream. The freezes were in the downlink from SN15 to the ground. If you go to 9:37 in the video, you can see that the overlaid text timestamp in the spacex stream continues to increment (3:06, 3:07, 3:08, etc). It actually is a video that plays normally. Their ground based equipment that was adding the framing and T+ overlay was working normally and sending out a normal stream, it was just receiving frozen video on its input side. Meaning that they were feeding normally formatted video to youtube at that time. What i got from youtube-dl looks like the following: https://pastebin.com/1JvVY6s4 https://pastebin.com/1JvVY6s4
- ww520 5y agoExcellent launch! Just watched it taking off. And touched down.
- jacquesm 5y agoBezos sues, Musk launches.
- dylan604 5y agoExactly. Still not sure about all of that litigation. At the end of the day, even if the review process gets re-opened for whatever details got changed last second, SpaceX has multiple trips there and back again. That would naturally put them in the lead of any contest.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y agoIt's quite routine in defense to sue or protest the contract decision no matter what. open protests at the GAO: https://www.gao.gov/legal/bid-protests/search?processed=1&closed=0#s-skipLinkTargetForMainSearchResults https://www.gao.gov/legal/bid-protests/search?processed=1&cl...
- rbanffy 5y agoTrue, but the optics aren’t good.
- mdorazio 5y agoOnly because we like spacex. Remember that they themselves sued the USAF not too long ago in a similar situation: https://spacenews.com/case-closed-california-judge-ends-spacexs-lawsuit-against-the-u-s-air-force/ https://spacenews.com/case-closed-california-judge-ends-spac...
- dylan604 5y ago"SpaceX challenged the Air Force over contracts the service awarded in October 2018 to United Launch Alliance, Northrop Grumman and Blue Origin." From that list, which company is actively launching humans to space? Has Blue Origin even been to space yet? Seriously asking, as I thought they kept going to near space for their testing. ULA might be sending satellites up, and Northrup Gruman can knock the dust off of their lunar landers to see if they can retro fit them , but they're not lifting off the ground by themselve either.
- baryphonic 5y agoThat was a fantastic flight! The previous ones were great to watch, too, but seeing them really stick the landing this time was a sight to see. Congratulations to the entire SpaceX team!
- decebalus1 5y agoDoes the naming bother anyone else? It's even less a Starship than an actual interstellar spacecraft than the Tesla self-driving tech is Autopilot. This type of bullshit branding just rubs me the wrong way. Edit: Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer. You can disagree as much as you want, it won't make the rocket a starship...
- newsclues 5y agoNo, I’m just happy people are launching new rockets. Imagine getting pissed off about the name of a breakthrough rocket.
- decebalus1 5y agoNot saying I'm not happy people are launching rockets. That's awesome. And I'm not 'pissed'. Just call them rockets, not starships. If tomorrow I write a wrapper on top of grep and call it a 'search engine', half of hackernews is gonna jump at my throat bUt ThAt'sNoT aSeaRchEngInE!!!
- NikolaeVarius 5y agoAnd yet people still refer to the orbiter as the Space Shuttle, when it isn't
- decebalus1 5y agowhich orbiter? What?
- lutorm 5y agoPresumably he's talking about the Space Transportation System, colloquially known as the "Space Shuttle".
- bkanber 5y agoAre q-tips shaped like a Q? Are Ford Explorers actually used for exploring? Is the Magic Bullet a type of ammunition that kills magical creatures? Is Wonderbread really wonderful?
- Buttons840 5y agoWhat goes into getting that rocket ready to fly again?
- SAI_Peregrinus 5y agoIt probably won't fly again, certainly not soon. SN20 will be the first one to fly on a Super Heavy. SN15 was built for this test, and as the first to land successfully they'll almost certainly be going over all of its parts looking for potentially problematic wear.
- senbarryobama 5y agoAnd all this from classical mechanics and no fancy ML/AI right?
- TimJRobinson 5y agoFor those looking for more explanation and commentary - I really enjoy the Everyday Astronaut streams of Starship. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htnG_mABtSQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htnG_mABtSQ is SN15
- glenneroo 5y agoI love his stream and was watching as well, but decided to also try out NASASpaceFlight (https://www.youtube.com/c/NASASpaceflightVideos https://www.youtube.com/c/NASASpaceflightVideos) and was pleasantly surprised. They had video feeds from multiple sides so you could really see the landing, as well as integrating the SpaceX live feed. I hope Tim does the same in the future, as they only showed a view of the landing pad and clouds during the entire flight i.e. we only saw 3 seconds of take-off and landing.
- TONY2021UK 5y agoYESSSSSSSS!!!!!
- TONY2021UK 5y agoYESSSSS - WELL DONE!!!!
- tigerBL00D 5y agoWhat is the significance of number 61 imprinted on the engine? Anyone?
- inetknght 5y agoIt's the engine serial number.
- chasd00 5y agoThe fire looked identical to the SN10 one only it started on the ground instead of in the air. After about 30 seconds I said out loud “someone put out the effing fire!” Haha The raptor engines seemed much better behaved on re-ignition. Although I can’t help but wonder about the fire.
- mnemotronic 5y agoHey! A no-RUD landing!(Rapid Unplanned Disassembly) I think it did the transition back to vertical at a higher altitude than previous attempts. Too bad there was cloud cover and the video was not working.
- ChuckMcM 5y agoThis is a huge milestone for the Starship team and SpaceX, so massive congratulations. This was also fun to watch. Fun in part because while SpaceX had it on "tape delay" the enthusiast channels were showing it live. It will be fun to have them do it without the low cloud cover but I'm guessing that without the disassembly at the end they may have some on-board recordings that are recoverable. To whomever does telemetry for these things, the frequency bands you are using are blocked by clouds. It makes it hard to keep a live signal. Ask the FCC for a temporary operating permit for 900Mhz or so. You will be much happier with the results. I was paying close attention to the area of 'heat shield' tiles. That is the next really big hurdle. If you recall getting the grid fins on F9 to survive re-entry was a big challenge. Getting tiles that don't break because the various expansion coefficients don't match is a big challenge as well. That is critical to having enough fuel left over to stop when you get back down inside the gravity well. It is easy to forget the scale of this thing without visual cues but its like flying skyscrapers around. They are very big. And the booster will be larger still. Also super curious how the lunar lander version will work. That is awfully high up there, could be a long ladder down to the surface. That, and given its mass, means that when it lands on the moon the dust it kicks up will hit escape velocity[1] which will be interesting. All in all though, so much progress in space after so much non-progress. Quite the thrill! [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.12312 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.12312
- tigershark 5y agoIt won’t use the raptors to land on the moon.
- ChuckMcM 5y agoThe question isn't raptors or something else, the question is mass. In order to decelerate, you throw mass at high speed out the other send. That is typically a small mass (the exhaust gases) hitting the moon at a high velocity. The larger the mass you are trying to land, the more momentum you are going to transfer to the regolith and dust under the lander. As the referenced paper points out, it is pretty easy to get that stuff up to escape velocity which has it leaving the moon on its own journey into space.