5 ms·

Interesting! Do you have the link to that discussion?

93po 3y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35219490 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35219490 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33973607 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33973607 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31368497 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31368497 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31153986 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31153986 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21944855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21944855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30353028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30353028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21400885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21400885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24215739 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24215739 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27010713 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27010713 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27765151 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27765151 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23077358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23077358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24460854 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24460854 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10497425 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10497425 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19874192 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19874192
- shkkmo 3y ago
  Most of those are not skeptical that starship can work. Lots of doubt around the specific claims for the amount that it can drop launch costs by, launch cadence, first launch time frame (which was correct in it's prediction of no 2022 launch), but not really much actual doubt that SpaceX can successfully launch starship.
  - 93po 3y ago
    The skepticism is always around the ability to have a successful Starship program, which includes all of the above. I don't think people are doubting the physics of it. The 2022 timeline comment focus for me was about the need to fundraise and have a "down round", which was wrong. Also their implication with "there's never been an engine production line which could build much more than one engine per week" and "the raptor engine production line is running much too slow" was resolved less than a year later when SpaceX was up to building a raptor engine every day[1] and is, as of February, at nearly 2 engines a day [2] [1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/11/spacex-is-now-building-a-raptor-engine-a-day-nasa-says/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/11/spacex-is-now-buildi... [2] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2022/02/starships-self-sustaining-city-mars/ https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2022/02/starships-self-susta...
    - shkkmo 3y ago
      I think you are trying too hard to fit those comments to your narrative. Even if starship fails to fully achieve the very optimistic estimates on every one of those fronts, the starship program can be very successful. HN has in my experience been fairly supportive of Starship's chance of success while pushing back on some of the wildly optimistic claims made about the program.
- belter 3y ago
  I made one of those: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31368497 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31368497 And there was nothing in the comment saying Starship could not be done. Was about something else.
  - 93po 3y ago
    "Will be landing uncrewed Starship on Mars in 3 to 5 years" I assume you quoted this to demonstrate it being inaccurate or wrong. My point is that Starship is theoretically able to do this today. The launch got scrubbed so we're missing confirmation of how ready it is, but presumably there's a high confidence level it's ready for orbital flight because otherwise the wouldn't be launching it just to explode millions of dollars of rocket. And going from orbital flight to ready to land on mars is a pretty simple roadmap and clearly something they'll have within 4 years (5 years from the comment being made)
    - belter 3y ago
      If you really believe they will be on Mars in 3 to 5 years, I publicly commit to pay you a dinner on the best restaurant of your choice, in the Olympus Mons district.
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      > My point is that Starship is theoretically able to do this today. Well, no, its theoretically capable of doing it in 6 months from an optimal launch window, which eats up at least 10% (I don’t have a calendar of launch windows for the 6 month to Mars mission profile handy) of the high end of the 3-5 year window for landing off the bat. But theory and practice are only the same in theory, not in practice.
    - _Tev 3y ago
      > And going from orbital flight to ready to land on mars is a pretty simple roadmap Not really, unless you mean "crash" landing. The 4 year estimate is overly optimistic as a result. Forget launch windows, just handling refueling and long term loitering (with engine restart after that) required for Mars mission with any reasonable chance of success will take majority of those 4 years. Especially if you are not willing to blow starships all the time. And that's also ignoring the tiny detail that Mars is not even in top3 priorities for starship even after successful fully orbital test and landing of both stages. Getting to high flight rate / launching Starlink v2 sats / HLS is much more important for SpaceX

93po 3y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35219490 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35219490 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33973607 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33973607 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31368497 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31368497 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31153986 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31153986 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21944855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21944855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30353028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30353028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21400885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21400885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24215739 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24215739 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27010713 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27010713 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27765151 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27765151 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23077358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23077358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24460854 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24460854 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10497425 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10497425 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19874192 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19874192

shkkmo 3y ago
Most of those are not skeptical that starship can work. Lots of doubt around the specific claims for the amount that it can drop launch costs by, launch cadence, first launch time frame (which was correct in it's prediction of no 2022 launch), but not really much actual doubt that SpaceX can successfully launch starship.
- 93po 3y ago
  The skepticism is always around the ability to have a successful Starship program, which includes all of the above. I don't think people are doubting the physics of it. The 2022 timeline comment focus for me was about the need to fundraise and have a "down round", which was wrong. Also their implication with "there's never been an engine production line which could build much more than one engine per week" and "the raptor engine production line is running much too slow" was resolved less than a year later when SpaceX was up to building a raptor engine every day[1] and is, as of February, at nearly 2 engines a day [2] [1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/11/spacex-is-now-building-a-raptor-engine-a-day-nasa-says/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/11/spacex-is-now-buildi... [2] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2022/02/starships-self-sustaining-city-mars/ https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2022/02/starships-self-susta...
  - shkkmo 3y ago
    I think you are trying too hard to fit those comments to your narrative. Even if starship fails to fully achieve the very optimistic estimates on every one of those fronts, the starship program can be very successful. HN has in my experience been fairly supportive of Starship's chance of success while pushing back on some of the wildly optimistic claims made about the program.
belter 3y ago
I made one of those: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31368497 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31368497 And there was nothing in the comment saying Starship could not be done. Was about something else.
- 93po 3y ago
  "Will be landing uncrewed Starship on Mars in 3 to 5 years" I assume you quoted this to demonstrate it being inaccurate or wrong. My point is that Starship is theoretically able to do this today. The launch got scrubbed so we're missing confirmation of how ready it is, but presumably there's a high confidence level it's ready for orbital flight because otherwise the wouldn't be launching it just to explode millions of dollars of rocket. And going from orbital flight to ready to land on mars is a pretty simple roadmap and clearly something they'll have within 4 years (5 years from the comment being made)
  - belter 3y ago
    If you really believe they will be on Mars in 3 to 5 years, I publicly commit to pay you a dinner on the best restaurant of your choice, in the Olympus Mons district.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > My point is that Starship is theoretically able to do this today. Well, no, its theoretically capable of doing it in 6 months from an optimal launch window, which eats up at least 10% (I don’t have a calendar of launch windows for the 6 month to Mars mission profile handy) of the high end of the 3-5 year window for landing off the bat. But theory and practice are only the same in theory, not in practice.
  - _Tev 3y ago
    > And going from orbital flight to ready to land on mars is a pretty simple roadmap Not really, unless you mean "crash" landing. The 4 year estimate is overly optimistic as a result. Forget launch windows, just handling refueling and long term loitering (with engine restart after that) required for Mars mission with any reasonable chance of success will take majority of those 4 years. Especially if you are not willing to blow starships all the time. And that's also ignoring the tiny detail that Mars is not even in top3 priorities for starship even after successful fully orbital test and landing of both stages. Getting to high flight rate / launching Starlink v2 sats / HLS is much more important for SpaceX