3 ms·

"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

by 93po 4y 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 4y 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 4y 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 4y 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

by 93po 4y ago

belter 4y 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 4y 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 4y 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