4 ms·

Does anyone else feel that calling this thing a "Starship" is too hyperbolic?

WJW 3y ago
Meh. The Saturn V rocket wasn't a literal god either, nor are the Falcon 9 rockets made out of actual falcons. People have been calling their vessels fanciful and/or aspirational names for centuries, it's fine. Nobody thinks the "unsinkable 2" is actually unsinkable.
- Bluestrike2 3y ago
  Starship seems kind of unique in that it's an extraordinarily utilitarian name compared to most launch system names.[0] It expressly doesn't try to evoke ancient human mythology, birds (which often have their own cultural and mythological ties i.e. Falcon, etc.). And perhaps therein lies the aspirational element of the name. Starship suggests a sort of banality, something so common that there's no point in dressing it up in a fanciful name. That's a dream in itself, though I think it's a given that individual Starship spacecraft will get named once they start carrying humans. Anyhow, I think the GP's thoughts were along the lines that Starship isn't actually a starship as neither the spacecraft nor the super heavy-lift rocket will ever visit another star. Which is a valid point, but not one that I think matters much either way. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_orbital_launch_systems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_orbital_launch_systems
  - krisoft 3y ago
    > And perhaps therein lies the aspirational element of the name. Very possible. It mirrors the naming convention of fictional spaceship in the Culture novel series. A series Musk is a professed admirer of. They even named two of their drone ships after fictional spacecraft from the series. In that series it is a running gag that other aliens find the Culture's naming convention lacking a certain gravitas. When you have one super weapon you might be tempted to call it "Death Star" or something. But when you have millions you let the warship AIs pick their own names and that is how you end up with a mighty warship named "All Through With This Niceness And Negotiation Stuff" or "Falling Outside The Normal Moral Constraints". That is a real flex, I would say. So all in all Musk is familiar with the concept you are talking about here. I can't say for certain if that is going on here or not though. Most likely a Culture spacecraft's AI would roll their eyes over a crude space dingy which can barely reach orbit called "Starship" though. :) So who knows.
  - aksss 3y ago
    > sort of banality There’s a gestalt to the word in the US. If the words are parsed or translated literally, particularly for esl, I can see how it would seem very plain. But speaking as a kid from the American eighties, I don’t think “starship” is banal - anything but! It evokes for me all sorts of wonder and fantasy, probably tied to the media consumed - movies like The Last Starfighter, old Trek reruns, and books and comics.
  - philwelch 3y ago
    > It expressly doesn't try to evoke ancient human mythology No, but it evokes modern human mythology (science fiction). Falcon does too, incidentally.
CarVac 3y ago
And Dragon isn't a mythical creature. (does Boeing's Starliner get a pass?)
- once_inc 3y ago
  Does it act as the liner for stars, or does it produce lines of stars?
robertlagrant 3y ago
I don't think it'll describe a hyperbola, so no.
GuB-42 3y ago
Hyperbolic, no, confusing, yes. Starship is both the name of the full rocket and the name of the upper stage, the lower stage is called "super heavy", which is as generic as you can get. Personally, I still like to call the full rocket BFR, as it was called before being named Starship.
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  >the lower stage is called "super heavy", which is as generic as you can get. Feels like they took my Kerbal designs as naming inspiration.
cubefox 3y ago
"Planetship" would have been better, or "Spaceship". A starship is something which flies to the stars.

WJW 3y ago

Meh. The Saturn V rocket wasn't a literal god either, nor are the Falcon 9 rockets made out of actual falcons. People have been calling their vessels fanciful and/or aspirational names for centuries, it's fine. Nobody thinks the "unsinkable 2" is actually unsinkable.

Bluestrike2 3y ago
Starship seems kind of unique in that it's an extraordinarily utilitarian name compared to most launch system names.[0] It expressly doesn't try to evoke ancient human mythology, birds (which often have their own cultural and mythological ties i.e. Falcon, etc.). And perhaps therein lies the aspirational element of the name. Starship suggests a sort of banality, something so common that there's no point in dressing it up in a fanciful name. That's a dream in itself, though I think it's a given that individual Starship spacecraft will get named once they start carrying humans. Anyhow, I think the GP's thoughts were along the lines that Starship isn't actually a starship as neither the spacecraft nor the super heavy-lift rocket will ever visit another star. Which is a valid point, but not one that I think matters much either way. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_orbital_launch_systems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_orbital_launch_systems
- krisoft 3y ago
  > And perhaps therein lies the aspirational element of the name. Very possible. It mirrors the naming convention of fictional spaceship in the Culture novel series. A series Musk is a professed admirer of. They even named two of their drone ships after fictional spacecraft from the series. In that series it is a running gag that other aliens find the Culture's naming convention lacking a certain gravitas. When you have one super weapon you might be tempted to call it "Death Star" or something. But when you have millions you let the warship AIs pick their own names and that is how you end up with a mighty warship named "All Through With This Niceness And Negotiation Stuff" or "Falling Outside The Normal Moral Constraints". That is a real flex, I would say. So all in all Musk is familiar with the concept you are talking about here. I can't say for certain if that is going on here or not though. Most likely a Culture spacecraft's AI would roll their eyes over a crude space dingy which can barely reach orbit called "Starship" though. :) So who knows.
- aksss 3y ago
  > sort of banality There’s a gestalt to the word in the US. If the words are parsed or translated literally, particularly for esl, I can see how it would seem very plain. But speaking as a kid from the American eighties, I don’t think “starship” is banal - anything but! It evokes for me all sorts of wonder and fantasy, probably tied to the media consumed - movies like The Last Starfighter, old Trek reruns, and books and comics.
- philwelch 3y ago
  > It expressly doesn't try to evoke ancient human mythology No, but it evokes modern human mythology (science fiction). Falcon does too, incidentally.

CarVac 3y ago

And Dragon isn't a mythical creature. (does Boeing's Starliner get a pass?)

once_inc 3y ago
Does it act as the liner for stars, or does it produce lines of stars?

robertlagrant 3y ago

I don't think it'll describe a hyperbola, so no.

GuB-42 3y ago

Hyperbolic, no, confusing, yes. Starship is both the name of the full rocket and the name of the upper stage, the lower stage is called "super heavy", which is as generic as you can get. Personally, I still like to call the full rocket BFR, as it was called before being named Starship.

mrguyorama 3y ago
>the lower stage is called "super heavy", which is as generic as you can get. Feels like they took my Kerbal designs as naming inspiration.

cubefox 3y ago

"Planetship" would have been better, or "Spaceship". A starship is something which flies to the stars.