4 ms·

> The easiest part about Starship is the booster because its not doing anything F9 isn't already. Just at a much larger scale. It's possible that its easier th

> The easiest part about Starship is the booster because its not doing anything F9 isn't already. Just at a much larger scale. It's possible that its easier than the other challenges starship faces, but everything I've read seems to suggest the raptor engine underpinning the entire project is massively behind schedule and over budget to the point of putting SpaceX at risk of bankruptcy (according to Elon).[1] It's also burning a completely different fuel and has numerous other massive changes so a booster leveraging it isn't really just F9 at a larger scale. [2] [1] https://spacenews.com/spacex-grapples-with-raptor-production-problems/ https://spacenews.com/spacex-grapples-with-raptor-production... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Raptor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Raptor

beambot 5y ago
Can get the latest updates directly from horse's mouth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N7L8Xhkzqo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N7L8Xhkzqo TLDR: Delay at this point is mostly regulatory (environmental study approvals) to launch out of Boca Chica. If they have to move to the Cape, then there will be delays.
- purpleidea 5y ago
  Not true. Musk said they weren't ready to launch yet anyways, and that they expected to be ready around the same time they expected to get FAA clearance. So it's not holding things up yet. And it might never.
  - beambot 5y ago
    OK, let me be more clear: The gating factor is FAA clearance, but it's not a delay yet. More specifically: Nominal date for FAA clearance is X. Actual clearance will be >X (these agencies are never complete early; it's already been delayed twice). SpaceX readiness date will be <= X. Therefore FAA clearance is the program bottleneck.
    - ncmncm 5y ago
      Claiming to be ready and just waiting on the FAA is good publicity, true or no. We can't tell from the outside.
      - beambot 5y ago
        Apparently we'll never know... My comment was entirely too prescient: just today the FAA pushed decision back by another month: https://www.space.com/faa-spacex-starship-review-delayed-march-28 https://www.space.com/faa-spacex-starship-review-delayed-mar...
    - simonh 5y ago
      >SpaceX readiness date will be <= X To be fair to the FAA, I wouldn't bet on that. It's not called Elon Time for nothing.
maccam94 5y ago
As of the Starship presentation last week, current production is 5 Raptor 2's per week and they are ramping up to 1/day. Starship is important for Starlink to finish its full-scale deployment cost-effectively, but if they deploy satellites at a lower rate on Falcon 9 this year it's not going to break the company. The delay right now is from FAA approval on Boca Chica launches, worst case SpaceX expects their new Florida Starship launch site to become operational before the end of the year.
- purpleidea 5y ago
  > The delay right now is from FAA approval on Boca Chica launches Not true. Musk said they weren't ready to launch yet anyways, and that they expected to be ready around the same time they expected to get FAA clearance. So it's not holding things up yet. And it might never.
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    Launching in the middle of a nature preserve was always going to be a problem. It would not be at all surprising if they did not get approval for anything like the launch cadence from Boca Chica that they had projected, and need to fall back on Florida and ocean platform launches. The delay to get that stuff ready might give them time to actually work out bugs, without them being treated as failures. And, there is little doubt those will work just as well, although standing that stack up on a floating platform will be an impressive achievement. Boca Chica will still be able to do tests. One wonders if they will deliver completed vehicles to the real launch sites by ("test") launching from Boca Chica. I don't think you need a Starship on top to launch the booster, although a cone hat seems advisable.
    - consumer451 5y ago
      > One wonders if they will deliver completed vehicles to the real launch sites by ("test") launching from Boca Chica. I don't think you need a Starship on top to launch the booster, although a cone hat seems advisable. I was just trying to imagine a booster delivery flight path. I'm assuming orbital otherwise FAA has appropriate concerns. So north of Cuba, achieve orbital speed for one orbit, de-orbit burn to re-enter aiming past Florida, and then landing burn to get you back over Cape Canaveral? Is it that straight forward? Would that be allowed? Would they need to dog leg to avoid flying over mainland USA?
thereddaikon 5y ago
Right, easy is a relative term. Its not trivial by any means but it is much more straight forward than the rest of the rocket.

beambot 5y ago

Can get the latest updates directly from horse's mouth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N7L8Xhkzqo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N7L8Xhkzqo TLDR: Delay at this point is mostly regulatory (environmental study approvals) to launch out of Boca Chica. If they have to move to the Cape, then there will be delays.

purpleidea 5y ago
Not true. Musk said they weren't ready to launch yet anyways, and that they expected to be ready around the same time they expected to get FAA clearance. So it's not holding things up yet. And it might never.
- beambot 5y ago
  OK, let me be more clear: The gating factor is FAA clearance, but it's not a delay yet. More specifically: Nominal date for FAA clearance is X. Actual clearance will be >X (these agencies are never complete early; it's already been delayed twice). SpaceX readiness date will be <= X. Therefore FAA clearance is the program bottleneck.
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    Claiming to be ready and just waiting on the FAA is good publicity, true or no. We can't tell from the outside.
    - beambot 5y ago
      Apparently we'll never know... My comment was entirely too prescient: just today the FAA pushed decision back by another month: https://www.space.com/faa-spacex-starship-review-delayed-march-28 https://www.space.com/faa-spacex-starship-review-delayed-mar...
  - simonh 5y ago
    >SpaceX readiness date will be <= X To be fair to the FAA, I wouldn't bet on that. It's not called Elon Time for nothing.

maccam94 5y ago

As of the Starship presentation last week, current production is 5 Raptor 2's per week and they are ramping up to 1/day. Starship is important for Starlink to finish its full-scale deployment cost-effectively, but if they deploy satellites at a lower rate on Falcon 9 this year it's not going to break the company. The delay right now is from FAA approval on Boca Chica launches, worst case SpaceX expects their new Florida Starship launch site to become operational before the end of the year.

purpleidea 5y ago
> The delay right now is from FAA approval on Boca Chica launches Not true. Musk said they weren't ready to launch yet anyways, and that they expected to be ready around the same time they expected to get FAA clearance. So it's not holding things up yet. And it might never.
- ncmncm 5y ago
  Launching in the middle of a nature preserve was always going to be a problem. It would not be at all surprising if they did not get approval for anything like the launch cadence from Boca Chica that they had projected, and need to fall back on Florida and ocean platform launches. The delay to get that stuff ready might give them time to actually work out bugs, without them being treated as failures. And, there is little doubt those will work just as well, although standing that stack up on a floating platform will be an impressive achievement. Boca Chica will still be able to do tests. One wonders if they will deliver completed vehicles to the real launch sites by ("test") launching from Boca Chica. I don't think you need a Starship on top to launch the booster, although a cone hat seems advisable.
  - consumer451 5y ago
    > One wonders if they will deliver completed vehicles to the real launch sites by ("test") launching from Boca Chica. I don't think you need a Starship on top to launch the booster, although a cone hat seems advisable. I was just trying to imagine a booster delivery flight path. I'm assuming orbital otherwise FAA has appropriate concerns. So north of Cuba, achieve orbital speed for one orbit, de-orbit burn to re-enter aiming past Florida, and then landing burn to get you back over Cape Canaveral? Is it that straight forward? Would that be allowed? Would they need to dog leg to avoid flying over mainland USA?

thereddaikon 5y ago

Right, easy is a relative term. Its not trivial by any means but it is much more straight forward than the rest of the rocket.