6 ms·

Starship IFT-6 Livestream (liftoff at 4pm CT)

80 points by grecy 2y ago

marviel 2y ago
unfortunately they had to scrap the booster Catch, due to undisclosed factors.
- mwambua 2y ago
  The explosion when it landed in the ocean was pretty epic though!
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- Ancalagon 2y ago
  did they land it on the barge instead?
  - pieix 2y ago
    No landing legs on Starship or its booster! Tower catch or bust.
    - Ancalagon 2y ago
      oh duh, thanks
  - teractiveodular 2y ago
    No, it was a water splashdown. Looked silky smooth though, they likely could have caught it again had they tried.
    - xnx 2y ago
      Water splashdown did look very smooth. I seemed like they cut the video before it exploded (I assume), but hopefully there's some third-party footage or SpaceX will release it later. Update: Looks like Spaceflight Now has the explosion at https://www.youtube.com/live/dtmvbQDou4I https://www.youtube.com/live/dtmvbQDou4I at about 90 minutes in
      - perihelions 2y ago
        There's a better camera here which shows the aftermath, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjDFirLcQDM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjDFirLcQDM (Everyday Astronaut) Landing is at about T+06:42.
        maxerickson 2y ago
        Boom is here: https://www.youtube.com/live/DjDFirLcQDM?feature=shared&t=11180 https://www.youtube.com/live/DjDFirLcQDM?feature=shared&t=11... This is a bit before that: https://www.youtube.com/live/DjDFirLcQDM?feature=shared&t=11100 https://www.youtube.com/live/DjDFirLcQDM?feature=shared&t=11...
  - oezi 2y ago
    Water splashdown.
  - perihelions 2y ago
    It did a controlled landing on the Gulf of Mexico, exploded, and now it's floating! Hasn't sunk yet; haven't seen any official comments yet about this novel situation.
    - oliwary 2y ago
      If I remember correctly last time this happened they shot missiles at a booster from a jet
      - perihelions 2y ago
        Oh, you're right: this did also happen back in 2018, with a Falcon booster (GovSat-1 launch). I don't think the part about the missiles was accurate though. https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/7w4pag/americaspace_article_air_force_strike_takes_out/ https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/7w4pag/americaspace... ("Air Force Didn’t Take Out SpaceX’s GovSat Booster, Private Company Did (UPDATED WITH CORRECTION)") https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16332582 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16332582 (ibid.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16279316 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16279316 ("SpaceX Rocket Survives Experimental High-Thrust Landing at Sea")
  - nycdotnet 2y ago
    no barge for super heavy- the point of the catch is to save weight on the massive legs that would be required. It “soft landed” in the Gulf a few miles off shore, meaning they did a burn and it entered the water not in freefall (though it still looked faster than I expected).
- ReptileMan 2y ago
  The way it gently splashed down in the ocean without hiccup - I think this is promising and that they will get to the chopsticks catching a booster is boring and mundane phase soon. Specialists would say why they aborted.
  - cubefox 2y ago
    Well, it made a big fireball. It's only that the official stream cut away before that. You could still hear the SpaceX crowd cheering as they (apparently) got to see it. The fireball was in any case visible in the NSF stream: https://www.youtube.com/live/6yd_cpPP4fE&t=3h31m35s https://www.youtube.com/live/6yd_cpPP4fE&t=3h31m35s Though the upper stage actually didn't explode this time, it only broke apart.
- the_king 2y ago
  I would love to see the dashboard that the team that made the decision was looking at. I'd be interested to hear speculation by people who know about this as to what they think went wrong. Was it off course? Did the engines not relight in time? Did it not have enough fuel?
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    They announced a no-go while it was still boosting towards space, so it won’t be a relight issue.
    - zamalek 2y ago
      I wonder whether doing a catch without the catcher (rapid scheduled crash landing) would be feasible. Data is data.
      - mulmen 2y ago
        > Data is data. This is one of those cases where technically correct is not the best kind of correct. Not all data is useful. A billion rows of sensor output is data but without a timestamp it’s useless. Maybe you need more or less resolution, or additional dimensions.
        m4rtink 2y ago
        If the duty cycle is stable enough, you can reconstruct the timestamps in many cases based on the data. ;-)
        mulmen 2y ago
        “If” is doing a lot of work there.
      - CompuHacker 2y ago
        That is what happened. It performs the maneuvers at a primary target site with no catcher, or terrain, or ground-based feedback; the Gulf; switching to an alternate site; the launch tower; if and only if all factors allow for a real catch.
gnarbarian 2y ago
Any word why they scrapped the booster catch?
- JoshuaJB 2y ago
  No official word, but the communication antenna on the tower appears to be damaged [1]. Seems likely that played a role. [1] https://x.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1858998330401190375 https://x.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1858998330401190375
  - MegaDeKay 2y ago
    Strange how it is leaning to one side but otherwise looks just fine. I'd have thought that anything with enough force to push it over like that would have caused other more visible damage. Pretty grainy video though.
- bandyaboot 2y ago
  Whatever it was, it seems more likely that it was a booster issue than anything relating to the tower given that they were initially go for the catch. It was only during the boostback burn that they scrapped it.
  - bandyaboot 2y ago
    The spacex website indicates that it was indeed an automated check of the tower that caused the catch to be scrapped.
teractiveodular 2y ago
Cost cutting in effect at SpaceX: Falcon Heavy used a Tesla Roadster as their test payload, Starship only has a banana.
- adolph 2y ago
  No shots of the banana yet post launch. Did it rip away from the strings? (Up until I typed this I hadn’t considered they might use an artificial banana.)
  - Laremere 2y ago
    Banana is on screen at T+00:24
    - dotancohen 2y ago
      With 5.2 million people watching. This flight probably broke the world record for most people watching a single specific banana, ever.
- state_less 2y ago
  I think it's an homage to previous chimp astronauts. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjCX5F74zIM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjCX5F74zIM Knight E6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ham_(chimpanzee) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ham_(chimpanzee)
- aaron695 2y ago
  [dead]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
postmeta 2y ago
NSF Stream commentary is fun too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yd_cpPP4fE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yd_cpPP4fE
d883kd8 2y ago
The booster still looked a bit flamey on the landing burn, I wonder if this is expected
grecy 2y ago
Elon: "Successful ocean landing of Starship! We will do one more ocean landing of the ship. If that goes well, then SpaceX will attempt to catch the ship with the tower." https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1859036912348262787 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1859036912348262787
- Gee101 2y ago
  Does this mean flying over populated land to attempt the catch?
  - grecy 2y ago
    I believe so, yes. Obviously it will be a different permit, and who knows how long that will take to be granted. Engine relight and controlled precise landings are obviously per-requisites, which is why they've been doing them.
Zigurd 2y ago
I'm a project management nerd, so let's take a look at the dependency chain to get to usefulness: to be anything other than an oversized orbital launcher, starship has to be refueled. Refueling depends on meeting payload specs, otherwise you need a too many starships to refuel one upper stage in orbit. Refueling also depends on rapid turnaround, which depends on near-zero damage to launch towers, engines, shields, and tanks. All of these dependencies depend on repeatability, which is why not catching the booster is a significant regression not a huge one, but marginal negative progress.

80 points by grecy 2y ago

marviel 2y ago

unfortunately they had to scrap the booster Catch, due to undisclosed factors.

mwambua 2y ago
The explosion when it landed in the ocean was pretty epic though!
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
Ancalagon 2y ago
did they land it on the barge instead?
- pieix 2y ago
  No landing legs on Starship or its booster! Tower catch or bust.
  - Ancalagon 2y ago
    oh duh, thanks
- teractiveodular 2y ago
  No, it was a water splashdown. Looked silky smooth though, they likely could have caught it again had they tried.
  - xnx 2y ago
    Water splashdown did look very smooth. I seemed like they cut the video before it exploded (I assume), but hopefully there's some third-party footage or SpaceX will release it later. Update: Looks like Spaceflight Now has the explosion at https://www.youtube.com/live/dtmvbQDou4I https://www.youtube.com/live/dtmvbQDou4I at about 90 minutes in
    - perihelions 2y ago
      There's a better camera here which shows the aftermath, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjDFirLcQDM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjDFirLcQDM (Everyday Astronaut) Landing is at about T+06:42.
      - maxerickson 2y ago
        Boom is here: https://www.youtube.com/live/DjDFirLcQDM?feature=shared&t=11180 https://www.youtube.com/live/DjDFirLcQDM?feature=shared&t=11... This is a bit before that: https://www.youtube.com/live/DjDFirLcQDM?feature=shared&t=11100 https://www.youtube.com/live/DjDFirLcQDM?feature=shared&t=11...
- oezi 2y ago
  Water splashdown.
- perihelions 2y ago
  It did a controlled landing on the Gulf of Mexico, exploded, and now it's floating! Hasn't sunk yet; haven't seen any official comments yet about this novel situation.
  - oliwary 2y ago
    If I remember correctly last time this happened they shot missiles at a booster from a jet
    - perihelions 2y ago
      Oh, you're right: this did also happen back in 2018, with a Falcon booster (GovSat-1 launch). I don't think the part about the missiles was accurate though. https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/7w4pag/americaspace_article_air_force_strike_takes_out/ https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/7w4pag/americaspace... ("Air Force Didn’t Take Out SpaceX’s GovSat Booster, Private Company Did (UPDATED WITH CORRECTION)") https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16332582 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16332582 (ibid.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16279316 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16279316 ("SpaceX Rocket Survives Experimental High-Thrust Landing at Sea")
- nycdotnet 2y ago
  no barge for super heavy- the point of the catch is to save weight on the massive legs that would be required. It “soft landed” in the Gulf a few miles off shore, meaning they did a burn and it entered the water not in freefall (though it still looked faster than I expected).
ReptileMan 2y ago
The way it gently splashed down in the ocean without hiccup - I think this is promising and that they will get to the chopsticks catching a booster is boring and mundane phase soon. Specialists would say why they aborted.
- cubefox 2y ago
  Well, it made a big fireball. It's only that the official stream cut away before that. You could still hear the SpaceX crowd cheering as they (apparently) got to see it. The fireball was in any case visible in the NSF stream: https://www.youtube.com/live/6yd_cpPP4fE&t=3h31m35s https://www.youtube.com/live/6yd_cpPP4fE&t=3h31m35s Though the upper stage actually didn't explode this time, it only broke apart.
the_king 2y ago
I would love to see the dashboard that the team that made the decision was looking at. I'd be interested to hear speculation by people who know about this as to what they think went wrong. Was it off course? Did the engines not relight in time? Did it not have enough fuel?
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  They announced a no-go while it was still boosting towards space, so it won’t be a relight issue.
  - zamalek 2y ago
    I wonder whether doing a catch without the catcher (rapid scheduled crash landing) would be feasible. Data is data.
    - mulmen 2y ago
      > Data is data. This is one of those cases where technically correct is not the best kind of correct. Not all data is useful. A billion rows of sensor output is data but without a timestamp it’s useless. Maybe you need more or less resolution, or additional dimensions.
      - m4rtink 2y ago
        If the duty cycle is stable enough, you can reconstruct the timestamps in many cases based on the data. ;-)
        mulmen 2y ago
        “If” is doing a lot of work there.
    - CompuHacker 2y ago
      That is what happened. It performs the maneuvers at a primary target site with no catcher, or terrain, or ground-based feedback; the Gulf; switching to an alternate site; the launch tower; if and only if all factors allow for a real catch.

gnarbarian 2y ago

Any word why they scrapped the booster catch?

JoshuaJB 2y ago
No official word, but the communication antenna on the tower appears to be damaged [1]. Seems likely that played a role. [1] https://x.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1858998330401190375 https://x.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1858998330401190375
- MegaDeKay 2y ago
  Strange how it is leaning to one side but otherwise looks just fine. I'd have thought that anything with enough force to push it over like that would have caused other more visible damage. Pretty grainy video though.
bandyaboot 2y ago
Whatever it was, it seems more likely that it was a booster issue than anything relating to the tower given that they were initially go for the catch. It was only during the boostback burn that they scrapped it.
- bandyaboot 2y ago
  The spacex website indicates that it was indeed an automated check of the tower that caused the catch to be scrapped.

teractiveodular 2y ago

Cost cutting in effect at SpaceX: Falcon Heavy used a Tesla Roadster as their test payload, Starship only has a banana.

adolph 2y ago
No shots of the banana yet post launch. Did it rip away from the strings? (Up until I typed this I hadn’t considered they might use an artificial banana.)
- Laremere 2y ago
  Banana is on screen at T+00:24
  - dotancohen 2y ago
    With 5.2 million people watching. This flight probably broke the world record for most people watching a single specific banana, ever.
state_less 2y ago
I think it's an homage to previous chimp astronauts. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjCX5F74zIM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjCX5F74zIM Knight E6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ham_(chimpanzee) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ham_(chimpanzee)
aaron695 2y ago
[dead]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

postmeta 2y ago

NSF Stream commentary is fun too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yd_cpPP4fE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yd_cpPP4fE

d883kd8 2y ago

The booster still looked a bit flamey on the landing burn, I wonder if this is expected

grecy 2y ago

Elon: "Successful ocean landing of Starship! We will do one more ocean landing of the ship. If that goes well, then SpaceX will attempt to catch the ship with the tower." https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1859036912348262787 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1859036912348262787

Gee101 2y ago
Does this mean flying over populated land to attempt the catch?
- grecy 2y ago
  I believe so, yes. Obviously it will be a different permit, and who knows how long that will take to be granted. Engine relight and controlled precise landings are obviously per-requisites, which is why they've been doing them.

Zigurd 2y ago

I'm a project management nerd, so let's take a look at the dependency chain to get to usefulness: to be anything other than an oversized orbital launcher, starship has to be refueled. Refueling depends on meeting payload specs, otherwise you need a too many starships to refuel one upper stage in orbit. Refueling also depends on rapid turnaround, which depends on near-zero damage to launch towers, engines, shields, and tanks. All of these dependencies depend on repeatability, which is why not catching the booster is a significant regression not a huge one, but marginal negative progress.