5 ms·

Last times catch was incredible, anything groundbreaking being attempted this time?

bryanlarsen 2y ago
They're working off the same license they used for test 5, so they basically have to exactly the same thing they did for test 5. They did manage to add this: "An additional objective for this flight will be attempting an in-space burn using a single Raptor engine, further demonstrating the capabilities required to conduct a ship deorbit burn prior to orbital missions."
- modeless 2y ago
  I think that's the last thing they need to do before they can actually launch satellites. I'm surprised there was no attempt on the last launch. Glad to see it this time. The improved Starlink constellation that Starship will enable is going to be awesome.
  - cryptonector 2y ago
    That and flap sturdiness, if they want to be able to re-enter over land so they can catch the ship.
    - modeless 2y ago
      It's not required for launching satellites. But yeah, they need to figure out the heat shield for the flap hinges before they can recover the ship.
      - cwillu 2y ago
        The next block of starship has an altered geometry/location of the flaps for that reason; it's more or less a solved problem, but not worth scrapping the older ones they've already built. Iirc, the launch after this one will be SN7, which is block 2 with the new geometry.
        jltsiren 2y ago
        It's not a solved problem. Surviving the re-entry in a condition that makes reuse economical was always the biggest challenge for the Starship. It's far from certain that they can achieve it without a fundamental change in the concept. The feasibility of building big rockets was already demonstrated a long time ago. Given the reliability of the Falcon 9, it looked plausible that a big rocket could work with many engines. And SpaceX had already shown that they can reuse boosters economically. But reusing orbital spacecraft – the entire upper stage with engines, fuel tanks, and whatever – without expensive and time-consuming refits is something nobody has done before.
        Dylan16807 2y ago
        They're saying that one specific part burning off is a solved problem, not the entire reuse process.
        cryptonector 2y ago
        If that part burning off is a solve problem then returning the orbital ship to the launchpad is too given that they are able to gently put it down on the sea, and that they are able to gently catch the booster. This part is basically the only problem left that is ship-specific. However for reuse (or rapid reuse) they might need to rethink heat shielding to reduce refurbishment time and cost.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - mnau 2y ago
    I think they will want to deal with heatshield first. As of now, it hasn't survived deorbiting. SpaceX can launch satellites using Falcon9 and do it routinely. Starship needs to be developed and reach milestones, so they can get paid by NASA. Having a payload is a complication (unless it's a fun payload, remember the roadster car :D)
    - cwillu 2y ago
      The next block of starship has altered flap geometry that should largely fix that.
    - laverya 2y ago
      I think they can probably do both at once - heatshield testing and pez dispenser testing shouldn't interfere with each other, so might as well use whatever spare upmass you have! Yeah you might lose the payload, but SpaceX has the cheapest satellites in the business from what I understand.
    - 93po 2y ago
      i hope the next dummy payload is a giant 2 story tall anime figurine, knowing musk it's not out of the question
- cryptonector 2y ago
  And they need to demo that the flaps hold up through re-entry with nominal, minimal damage, otherwise a permit for a plan involving re-entry over land (which is needed to catch the ship) would obviously not issue.
  - bryanlarsen 2y ago
    They've addressed that in Block 2. Test 6 still flies block 1, so we won't see any substantive improvements on that until test 7.
- scotty79 2y ago
  That's cool PR move. If they managed to light one then it's great success. If they don't people will think they just got unlucky. But if they tried to light all and only one would work or none, or one would work but some other blew up whole rocket it would look terrible. That last eventuality is something they want to prevent by trying to light just one.
sebzim4500 2y ago
It's not groundbreaking but it's important. They are demonstrating in orbit relight capability of the raptor engines. This is an absolute requirement before they can put it fully into orbit because losing control of a Starship in low earth orbit would be catastrophic.
- lysace 2y ago
  > because losing control of a Starship in low earth orbit would be catastrophic Why? Remote detonation wouldn't work in that case?
  - perihelions 2y ago
    Remote termination is something they can do in the early boost phase, when there is a defined hazard zone over a depopulated patch of ocean. It doesn't cause the rocket to disappear; its effect is to disable the engines, end uncontrolled acceleration, and break the booster apart into small pieces—all of which will still fall to the ground (ocean) as debris. If you did this to a Starship in orbit, you'd likely have large chunks of steel reentering and reaching the ground intact.
    - lysace 2y ago
      If I understand you correctly: So you'd have to do it over unpopulated/depopulated areas, which is impossible to guarantee when you are zooming around the globe at very high speeds. Thanks for explaining.
    - mcswell 2y ago
      "...all of which will still fall to the ground (ocean) as debris..." After it's been flying in orbit for awhile, where it could in theory hit something else. As you say, the other part of it--and probably more important--is that if it's turned into orbiting pieces, there's no control over where it lands. Some of it could easily land on the ground rather than the ocean, who knows where. That of course has happened with other satellites and their final stage rockets in the past (notably by the Chinese), but Starship is bigger, and therefore the pieces that hit the ground could be bigger. By launching it sub-orbital for now, and turning off the engines so it lands in the middle of the Indian Ocean, the risks of both orbital debris and unknown ground landing points are avoided.
panick21_ 2y ago
Not to much mostly just a repeat. Just engine relight on the upper stage. The reason for this is that the next version is much improved and almost ready. That's the one they will really want to do the next steps with.

They're working off the same license they used for test 5, so they basically have to exactly the same thing they did for test 5. They did manage to add this: "An additional objective for this flight will be attempting an in-space burn using a single Raptor engine, further demonstrating the capabilities required to conduct a ship deorbit burn prior to orbital missions."

modeless 2y ago
I think that's the last thing they need to do before they can actually launch satellites. I'm surprised there was no attempt on the last launch. Glad to see it this time. The improved Starlink constellation that Starship will enable is going to be awesome.
- cryptonector 2y ago
  That and flap sturdiness, if they want to be able to re-enter over land so they can catch the ship.
  - modeless 2y ago
    It's not required for launching satellites. But yeah, they need to figure out the heat shield for the flap hinges before they can recover the ship.
    - cwillu 2y ago
      The next block of starship has an altered geometry/location of the flaps for that reason; it's more or less a solved problem, but not worth scrapping the older ones they've already built. Iirc, the launch after this one will be SN7, which is block 2 with the new geometry.
      - jltsiren 2y ago
        It's not a solved problem. Surviving the re-entry in a condition that makes reuse economical was always the biggest challenge for the Starship. It's far from certain that they can achieve it without a fundamental change in the concept. The feasibility of building big rockets was already demonstrated a long time ago. Given the reliability of the Falcon 9, it looked plausible that a big rocket could work with many engines. And SpaceX had already shown that they can reuse boosters economically. But reusing orbital spacecraft – the entire upper stage with engines, fuel tanks, and whatever – without expensive and time-consuming refits is something nobody has done before.
        Dylan16807 2y ago
        They're saying that one specific part burning off is a solved problem, not the entire reuse process.
        cryptonector 2y ago
        If that part burning off is a solve problem then returning the orbital ship to the launchpad is too given that they are able to gently put it down on the sea, and that they are able to gently catch the booster. This part is basically the only problem left that is ship-specific. However for reuse (or rapid reuse) they might need to rethink heat shielding to reduce refurbishment time and cost.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- mnau 2y ago
  I think they will want to deal with heatshield first. As of now, it hasn't survived deorbiting. SpaceX can launch satellites using Falcon9 and do it routinely. Starship needs to be developed and reach milestones, so they can get paid by NASA. Having a payload is a complication (unless it's a fun payload, remember the roadster car :D)
  - cwillu 2y ago
    The next block of starship has altered flap geometry that should largely fix that.
  - laverya 2y ago
    I think they can probably do both at once - heatshield testing and pez dispenser testing shouldn't interfere with each other, so might as well use whatever spare upmass you have! Yeah you might lose the payload, but SpaceX has the cheapest satellites in the business from what I understand.
  - 93po 2y ago
    i hope the next dummy payload is a giant 2 story tall anime figurine, knowing musk it's not out of the question
cryptonector 2y ago
And they need to demo that the flaps hold up through re-entry with nominal, minimal damage, otherwise a permit for a plan involving re-entry over land (which is needed to catch the ship) would obviously not issue.
- bryanlarsen 2y ago
  They've addressed that in Block 2. Test 6 still flies block 1, so we won't see any substantive improvements on that until test 7.
scotty79 2y ago
That's cool PR move. If they managed to light one then it's great success. If they don't people will think they just got unlucky. But if they tried to light all and only one would work or none, or one would work but some other blew up whole rocket it would look terrible. That last eventuality is something they want to prevent by trying to light just one.

sebzim4500 2y ago

It's not groundbreaking but it's important. They are demonstrating in orbit relight capability of the raptor engines. This is an absolute requirement before they can put it fully into orbit because losing control of a Starship in low earth orbit would be catastrophic.

lysace 2y ago
> because losing control of a Starship in low earth orbit would be catastrophic Why? Remote detonation wouldn't work in that case?
- perihelions 2y ago
  Remote termination is something they can do in the early boost phase, when there is a defined hazard zone over a depopulated patch of ocean. It doesn't cause the rocket to disappear; its effect is to disable the engines, end uncontrolled acceleration, and break the booster apart into small pieces—all of which will still fall to the ground (ocean) as debris. If you did this to a Starship in orbit, you'd likely have large chunks of steel reentering and reaching the ground intact.
  - lysace 2y ago
    If I understand you correctly: So you'd have to do it over unpopulated/depopulated areas, which is impossible to guarantee when you are zooming around the globe at very high speeds. Thanks for explaining.
  - mcswell 2y ago
    "...all of which will still fall to the ground (ocean) as debris..." After it's been flying in orbit for awhile, where it could in theory hit something else. As you say, the other part of it--and probably more important--is that if it's turned into orbiting pieces, there's no control over where it lands. Some of it could easily land on the ground rather than the ocean, who knows where. That of course has happened with other satellites and their final stage rockets in the past (notably by the Chinese), but Starship is bigger, and therefore the pieces that hit the ground could be bigger. By launching it sub-orbital for now, and turning off the engines so it lands in the middle of the Indian Ocean, the risks of both orbital debris and unknown ground landing points are avoided.

panick21_ 2y ago

Not to much mostly just a repeat. Just engine relight on the upper stage. The reason for this is that the next version is much improved and almost ready. That's the one they will really want to do the next steps with.