4 ms·

Flight 1 made a mess of their own launch pad. Why is that the concern of anyone besides SpaceX? They refurbished and reinforced it for flight 2.

amluto 2y ago
It's not clear to me exactly how far the mess extended, but this seems well past "their own launch pad": https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/12v7qsp/view_of_the_starship_rocket_throwing_concrete/ https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/12v7qsp/view_of_the...
- vatueil 2y ago
  The video is of cars parked next to the launch pad area, taken by remotely operated cameras. No one was endangered. Also, as dramatic as it looks, it is hardly an environmental disaster. I daresay paving over the land with asphalt and concrete had a larger impact. And there have already been several launches since then. Those went more smoothly and were not delayed. The reasons for the delay this time have nothing to do with this.
  - FireBeyond 2y ago
    How quick your argument went from "what are you talking about, the only damage was to the launch pad" to "yeah, so it flung chunks of concrete into the ocean miles away, hit cars parked at the facility and stuff, but so what?"
    - vatueil 2y ago
      I am not the previous commenter, and your description of the video is inaccurate. The point that the launch did not cause major environmental issues remains true. The fact that subsequent launches were approved demonstrates as such. I would also point out that other rocket launches routinely dump their boosters containing solid or liquid fuel in the ocean.
      - FireBeyond 2y ago
        > I am not the previous commenter My apologies - that was an oversight on my part. > The fact that subsequent launches were approved demonstrates as such. No it doesn't. SpaceX made several changes to the launchpad and supporting structures. Implying that there were zero changes between that launch and the subsequent is not accurate.
        vatueil 2y ago
        SpaceX did make changes to prevent damage to the launch pad in the future, true. I did not mean to suggest otherwise. My point is that the "mess" the original comment complained about was not a major environmental issue, as they implied, and that it did not prevent subsequent launches from being approved.
Teever 2y ago
Because the damage to the launch pad could have damaged the rocket in a way which could have made it damage other people's property.
- aeternum 2y ago
  This is not true. The path of the rocket is carefully chosen so that an abort/explosion does not intersect with other people's property. It launches over the ocean.
  - FireBeyond 2y ago
    Unless the guidance/steering systems are damaged, of course. Like by chunks of concrete hitting them that might otherwise have enough energy behind them to land a mile or two away in the ocean? Might that potentially affect the path of a rocket? If not, why not?
    - justinclift 2y ago
      Are you forgetting about the abort system which self-destructs the rocket if/when that happens?
      - Teever 2y ago
        Didn't the abort system fail on the rocket that we're talking about? Or was that the one after?
        aeternum 2y ago
        Trajectory is planned such that the ballistic trajectory minimizes the probability it will hit land. So it is relatively safe even if the engines and abort system fails. You can see the trajectory here and how they thread it through the Caribbean islands & Cuba. https://sattrackcam.blogspot.com/2023/11/new-starship-launch-attempt-on-november.html https://sattrackcam.blogspot.com/2023/11/new-starship-launch...
- 2y ago

amluto 2y ago

It's not clear to me exactly how far the mess extended, but this seems well past "their own launch pad": https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/12v7qsp/view_of_the_starship_rocket_throwing_concrete/ https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/12v7qsp/view_of_the...

vatueil 2y ago
The video is of cars parked next to the launch pad area, taken by remotely operated cameras. No one was endangered. Also, as dramatic as it looks, it is hardly an environmental disaster. I daresay paving over the land with asphalt and concrete had a larger impact. And there have already been several launches since then. Those went more smoothly and were not delayed. The reasons for the delay this time have nothing to do with this.
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  How quick your argument went from "what are you talking about, the only damage was to the launch pad" to "yeah, so it flung chunks of concrete into the ocean miles away, hit cars parked at the facility and stuff, but so what?"
  - vatueil 2y ago
    I am not the previous commenter, and your description of the video is inaccurate. The point that the launch did not cause major environmental issues remains true. The fact that subsequent launches were approved demonstrates as such. I would also point out that other rocket launches routinely dump their boosters containing solid or liquid fuel in the ocean.
    - FireBeyond 2y ago
      > I am not the previous commenter My apologies - that was an oversight on my part. > The fact that subsequent launches were approved demonstrates as such. No it doesn't. SpaceX made several changes to the launchpad and supporting structures. Implying that there were zero changes between that launch and the subsequent is not accurate.
      - vatueil 2y ago
        SpaceX did make changes to prevent damage to the launch pad in the future, true. I did not mean to suggest otherwise. My point is that the "mess" the original comment complained about was not a major environmental issue, as they implied, and that it did not prevent subsequent launches from being approved.

Teever 2y ago

Because the damage to the launch pad could have damaged the rocket in a way which could have made it damage other people's property.

aeternum 2y ago
This is not true. The path of the rocket is carefully chosen so that an abort/explosion does not intersect with other people's property. It launches over the ocean.
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  Unless the guidance/steering systems are damaged, of course. Like by chunks of concrete hitting them that might otherwise have enough energy behind them to land a mile or two away in the ocean? Might that potentially affect the path of a rocket? If not, why not?
  - justinclift 2y ago
    Are you forgetting about the abort system which self-destructs the rocket if/when that happens?
    - Teever 2y ago
      Didn't the abort system fail on the rocket that we're talking about? Or was that the one after?
      - aeternum 2y ago
        Trajectory is planned such that the ballistic trajectory minimizes the probability it will hit land. So it is relatively safe even if the engines and abort system fails. You can see the trajectory here and how they thread it through the Caribbean islands & Cuba. https://sattrackcam.blogspot.com/2023/11/new-starship-launch-attempt-on-november.html https://sattrackcam.blogspot.com/2023/11/new-starship-launch...
2y ago