3 ms·

Falcon 9, the last SpaceX Rocket design before Raptor has a 99.34% success rate. To match the success of SpaceX’s previous rocket design the next ~450 launches

Falcon 9, the last SpaceX Rocket design before Raptor has a 99.34% success rate. To match the success of SpaceX’s previous rocket design the next ~450 launches of a rocket using a Raptor engine needs to not fail a single mission. Starship really is a make or break moment for SpaceX. They will lose all competitive advantage as the European Space Agency, China, and other private entities such as Blue Origin begin to catch up. The failure of SLS is still able to carry a payload to the moon at a 100% mission success rate so far. The whole Artemis program probably needs to be scrapped at this point.

ekianjo 2y ago
> as the European Space Agency, China, and other private entities such as Blue Origin begin to catch up. Catching up when? In 20 years? Nobody is close to doing what spacex is doing right now
- kemotep 2y ago
  Yeah no one is close to Starship levels of payload. But SpaceX is 0 for 2 testing any kind of payload capacity for Starship and it’s been over 2 years of testing now. 12 if you count BFR. If SLS is an abject failure due to costs and time then its 100% mission completion record makes it currently more capable than Starship. So is no one close? Is Starship a failure? How many times do we have to watch a rocket explode when other programs and systems don’t and be told it’s all part of the plan this was actually a successful launch?
  - ekianjo 2y ago
    > 100% mission completion They launched once. You don't make up stats on n=1 > So is no one close? Is Starship a failure? How many times do we have to watch a rocket explode when other programs and systems don’t and be told it’s all part of the plan this was actually a successful launch? They mentioned it every single time before a launch: this is for learning. They expect things to go wrong. They don't expect things to be successful every single time. And they launch way more often than just any other company out there, so it's fair to say they are less careful about being 100% ready and rather want to test things and iterate on them. They also failed many times with the earlier rockets until they finally got it right - why do you think this time it will be different?
tim333 2y ago
The comparison is a bit unfair as Falcon 9 was a pretty conventional design whereas with Sartship they are trying for full reusability to orbit which hasn't been done before.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

ekianjo 2y ago

> as the European Space Agency, China, and other private entities such as Blue Origin begin to catch up. Catching up when? In 20 years? Nobody is close to doing what spacex is doing right now

kemotep 2y ago
Yeah no one is close to Starship levels of payload. But SpaceX is 0 for 2 testing any kind of payload capacity for Starship and it’s been over 2 years of testing now. 12 if you count BFR. If SLS is an abject failure due to costs and time then its 100% mission completion record makes it currently more capable than Starship. So is no one close? Is Starship a failure? How many times do we have to watch a rocket explode when other programs and systems don’t and be told it’s all part of the plan this was actually a successful launch?
- ekianjo 2y ago
  > 100% mission completion They launched once. You don't make up stats on n=1 > So is no one close? Is Starship a failure? How many times do we have to watch a rocket explode when other programs and systems don’t and be told it’s all part of the plan this was actually a successful launch? They mentioned it every single time before a launch: this is for learning. They expect things to go wrong. They don't expect things to be successful every single time. And they launch way more often than just any other company out there, so it's fair to say they are less careful about being 100% ready and rather want to test things and iterate on them. They also failed many times with the earlier rockets until they finally got it right - why do you think this time it will be different?

tim333 2y ago

The comparison is a bit unfair as Falcon 9 was a pretty conventional design whereas with Sartship they are trying for full reusability to orbit which hasn't been done before.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]