4 ms·

Seeing the Starship's flap visibly burning in the reentry heat and still survive well enough to move around and get to a splashdown was just incredible. Amazing

Seeing the Starship's flap visibly burning in the reentry heat and still survive well enough to move around and get to a splashdown was just incredible. Amazing progress in just four test flights.

kobalsky 2y ago
saw that and wondered how do they go from there to reusable. is the shileding ablative and replaced on every flight?
baq 2y ago
yeah the thing did a soft splashdown with a leaking flap, the fluid in question being molten stainless steel. this was hard sci-fi, streamed live for everyone to see.
marmakoide 2y ago
That flap is already a legend, kept at it even mangled by hot plasma, crazy accelerations and pressures, spitting molten steel at the camera. What a role model, the little flap that could.
- thelittleone 2y ago
  Someone on the Everyday Astronaut live stream named it "Flap Norris".
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - somenameforme 2y ago
    I wonder what the odds are that some deep sea salvage group is moving to collect that this very instant (or being contracted for such). If Starship lives up to even a fraction of its potential, that [not so] little guy is going to have some serious historicity.
    - hindsightbias 2y ago
      What makes you think it sank? If the hull is intact it might be floating. Given the flap damage, it's probably leaking though.
      - Andrew_nenakhov 2y ago
        It looked like the booster exploded when it submerged after soft splashdown. There was some fire and the stream cut off. Maybe that's what happened to the ship too.
        inglor_cz 2y ago
        IIRC the intent was to sink it using explosives (Flight Termination System) in case it stays afloat after landing.
        stoobs 2y ago
        I think they had a tug go out to drag it to deeper water and make sure it sunk - there was some ship (ocean) commentry I saw in a couple of places showing the tracking data.
    - dotnet00 2y ago
      They had a plane flying in the area shortly after landing, probably to drop some marker for a group to come around and recover the black box. I think they've stopped bothering with preserving the test articles though, in the process of test driven development, they're going to have so many "historic" test articles, that it's kind of pointless.
      - BurningFrog 2y ago
        I'd be really surprised if they didn't have a GPS in the ship. Which should mean they know where it "landed".
        2y ago
  - simonebrunozzi 2y ago
    Absolutely genius! Go Chuck :)
- amelius 2y ago
  Makes me want to play flappy bird.
- seydor 2y ago
  And let's not forget about the other flap, toiling away away from publicity
gpm 2y ago
Also lost an engine at startup and another engine during the landing burn on the booster. Judging by the debris maybe a third engine during landing burn shutdown (or maybe that was the second engine just exploding a bit more). Still a successful test, still a lot of work to do before they can meet their promises for Artemis (which require >10 back to back launches for one lunar mission...)
- thelittleone 2y ago
  True. Heard SpaceX commentator today saying they plan 4 launch towers in near term. Hopefully the major issues that lead to FAA investigations are resolved and the cadence can ramp up. Probably won't be long before Starship's launch as often as Falcon 9s today.
  - DylanSp 2y ago
    The FAA's license authorization for this flight mentioned that they wouldn't require a full mishap investigation unless someone got hurt, property got damaged, or debris fell outside the designated areas, so the turnaround for approving the next flight should be pretty quick. https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/1798089390708687106 https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/1798089390708687106 has the full text.
    - zarzavat 2y ago
      This says failure of Raptor during landing is excepted from investigation, doesn’t that imply that FAA will have to investigate the failure of Raptor during launch?
      - simonh 2y ago
        I think that makes sense. Failures on launch are potentially a risk to the surrounding area, whereas you're dropping massive chunks of metal on the target areas for touchdown anyway. What shape, size or how many pieces of metal at that end doesn't materially change the risk profile.
      - 2y ago
2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
Was Starship empty or did it have a simulated payload?

Seeing the Starship's flap visibly burning in the reentry heat and still survive well enough to move around and get to a splashdown was just incredible. Amazing progress in just four test flights.

kobalsky 2y ago

saw that and wondered how do they go from there to reusable. is the shileding ablative and replaced on every flight?

baq 2y ago

yeah the thing did a soft splashdown with a leaking flap, the fluid in question being molten stainless steel. this was hard sci-fi, streamed live for everyone to see.

marmakoide 2y ago

That flap is already a legend, kept at it even mangled by hot plasma, crazy accelerations and pressures, spitting molten steel at the camera. What a role model, the little flap that could.

thelittleone 2y ago
Someone on the Everyday Astronaut live stream named it "Flap Norris".
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- somenameforme 2y ago
  I wonder what the odds are that some deep sea salvage group is moving to collect that this very instant (or being contracted for such). If Starship lives up to even a fraction of its potential, that [not so] little guy is going to have some serious historicity.
  - hindsightbias 2y ago
    What makes you think it sank? If the hull is intact it might be floating. Given the flap damage, it's probably leaking though.
    - Andrew_nenakhov 2y ago
      It looked like the booster exploded when it submerged after soft splashdown. There was some fire and the stream cut off. Maybe that's what happened to the ship too.
      - inglor_cz 2y ago
        IIRC the intent was to sink it using explosives (Flight Termination System) in case it stays afloat after landing.
        stoobs 2y ago
        I think they had a tug go out to drag it to deeper water and make sure it sunk - there was some ship (ocean) commentry I saw in a couple of places showing the tracking data.
  - dotnet00 2y ago
    They had a plane flying in the area shortly after landing, probably to drop some marker for a group to come around and recover the black box. I think they've stopped bothering with preserving the test articles though, in the process of test driven development, they're going to have so many "historic" test articles, that it's kind of pointless.
    - BurningFrog 2y ago
      I'd be really surprised if they didn't have a GPS in the ship. Which should mean they know where it "landed".
      - 2y ago
- simonebrunozzi 2y ago
  Absolutely genius! Go Chuck :)
amelius 2y ago
Makes me want to play flappy bird.
seydor 2y ago
And let's not forget about the other flap, toiling away away from publicity

gpm 2y ago

Also lost an engine at startup and another engine during the landing burn on the booster. Judging by the debris maybe a third engine during landing burn shutdown (or maybe that was the second engine just exploding a bit more). Still a successful test, still a lot of work to do before they can meet their promises for Artemis (which require >10 back to back launches for one lunar mission...)

thelittleone 2y ago
True. Heard SpaceX commentator today saying they plan 4 launch towers in near term. Hopefully the major issues that lead to FAA investigations are resolved and the cadence can ramp up. Probably won't be long before Starship's launch as often as Falcon 9s today.
- DylanSp 2y ago
  The FAA's license authorization for this flight mentioned that they wouldn't require a full mishap investigation unless someone got hurt, property got damaged, or debris fell outside the designated areas, so the turnaround for approving the next flight should be pretty quick. https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/1798089390708687106 https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/1798089390708687106 has the full text.
  - zarzavat 2y ago
    This says failure of Raptor during landing is excepted from investigation, doesn’t that imply that FAA will have to investigate the failure of Raptor during launch?
    - simonh 2y ago
      I think that makes sense. Failures on launch are potentially a risk to the surrounding area, whereas you're dropping massive chunks of metal on the target areas for touchdown anyway. What shape, size or how many pieces of metal at that end doesn't materially change the risk profile.
    - 2y ago

2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago

Was Starship empty or did it have a simulated payload?