3 ms·

Still not orbital? Well done, of course, props and snaps. But I'm looking forward to it getting up to full speed, and being able to get down from that.

cryptoz 1y ago
They're testing specific things with no need for full orbit, although I think they reach verrrry close to orbital velocity. They want the payload dummies to 'de-orbit' quickly (from a suborbital trajectory). They could easily have gone orbital if they wanted to. I guess we'll see orbital demonstrations after a few splashdowns of v3 stack early next year.
ls612 1y ago
They go up to 98% of orbital velocity on purpose to ensure they don’t create space junk if something goes wrong.
- reassess_blind 1y ago
  If it gets up to that speed and something goes wrong, is the entire possible crash trajectory over the ocean?
  - dotnet00 1y ago
    I think it depends on which specific step fails. The farther into flight it happens, the narrower the area over which the debris is spread. But, I think being over the entire ocean is unlikely, since the trajectory intersects with the planet, and that intersection point would also have to be in the ocean. Correction: the trajectory only intersects with the planet prior to engine relight testing. After that it's at ~50km [1] (though to be fair, if they make it safely through the relight, all testing so far shows they're likely to make it through most of reentry) [1] https://x.com/planet4589/status/1977917833825730792 https://x.com/planet4589/status/1977917833825730792
  - ls612 1y ago
    There’s a very short period of time where if it exploded debris would fall on the African continent which is an unavoidable risk of orbital flight out of the US. Other than that it’ll either fall in the Atlantic or Indian Ocean.
  - oskarkk 1y ago
    Yes, as after it leaves the atmosphere and achieves that 98% of orbital speed, its trajectory wouldn't change much even if it exploded - its engines are turned off after ascent that takes ~9 minutes, then it free-falls for an hour to the other side of the Earth. They target a spot in the Indian Ocean near the west coast of Australia (it's coming from the west). In case of explosion debris would fall to the ocean sooner, farther to the west from Australia. More dangerous part of the flight is ascent (when it gains that speed), as its ground path is near some Caribbean islands, and it can cause problems like on flight 7: > Around three minutes later, Ship 33 exploded over the Turks and Caicos Islands, causing debris to litter the Caribbean islands, Puerto Rico and the British Virgin Islands. While no injuries were reported, the debris caused minimal damage to infrastructure in Puerto Rico and the British Virgin Islands, and prompted airspace closures in the region for over an hour. The FAA ordered SpaceX to perform a mishap investigation into the breakup, grounding Starship until the inquiry was complete. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_flight_test_7#Mission_outcome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_flight_test_7#Mission...
    - indoordin0saur 1y ago
      It's fully orbital speed but the trajectory is steep enough such that it'll come back down in the Indian ocean whether they maintain control or not.
      - oskarkk 1y ago
        Technically, the trajectory of the last couple of flights is a transatmospheric orbit, meaning that if the Earth didn't have atmosphere, it would be an actual orbit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatmospheric_orbit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatmospheric_orbit
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago
  Are you going to say the same thing about their 500th suborbital test?
- extraduder_ire 1y ago
  They go above orbital velocity, they are avoiding an orbital trajectory.
- ReptileMan 1y ago
  A rapid unscheduled decomposition at that height will accelerate at least some junk into orbit.
dotnet00 1y ago
I think they're holding off on going fully orbital until the Ship engines are relatively stable (they try out different things with them almost every flight, and V3 has a significantly improved engine design too), tile losses are relatively under control and they're either ready to start testing Ship catches, or have tested them. Right now they're in a comfortable testing regime, getting up to near-orbital speed to be able to verify reentry in realistic conditions, while having the freedom to test dummy payload deployments and freedom to risk losing tiles since they will all definitely burn up or splash down within minutes of the ship reentry rather than floating around in orbit for some time. If they go orbital, they had better be sure they won't leave a ton of tiles behind, and that they will be able to perform a controlled deorbit.
- stinkbeetle 1y ago
  I think they'll start launching starlink v3 satellites pretty soon, before perfecting reentry let alone rapid reuse. They've demonstrated a zero-gravity engine re-light several times and deployed dummy sats twice, that's all they need to put real satellites in orbit. We could see it on the second or third launch of the block 3 rockets.
  - dotnet00 1y ago
    I think the tile loss rate will still be important to them before that. Even in such low orbits, any tiles lost would take some time to come down (and might even survive all the way down). If they can make it so they only lose tiles when in a suborbital trajectory, they may be safe to begin deploying real Starlinks as soon as V3 has proven engine relight.
    - stinkbeetle 1y ago
      Oh, do you think so? I thought they're looking very good outside the atmosphere at least, although it's difficult to really tell. I'd be surprised if that holds things up but you could be right.
      - 1y ago

cryptoz 1y ago

They're testing specific things with no need for full orbit, although I think they reach verrrry close to orbital velocity. They want the payload dummies to 'de-orbit' quickly (from a suborbital trajectory). They could easily have gone orbital if they wanted to. I guess we'll see orbital demonstrations after a few splashdowns of v3 stack early next year.

ls612 1y ago

They go up to 98% of orbital velocity on purpose to ensure they don’t create space junk if something goes wrong.

reassess_blind 1y ago
If it gets up to that speed and something goes wrong, is the entire possible crash trajectory over the ocean?
- dotnet00 1y ago
  I think it depends on which specific step fails. The farther into flight it happens, the narrower the area over which the debris is spread. But, I think being over the entire ocean is unlikely, since the trajectory intersects with the planet, and that intersection point would also have to be in the ocean. Correction: the trajectory only intersects with the planet prior to engine relight testing. After that it's at ~50km [1] (though to be fair, if they make it safely through the relight, all testing so far shows they're likely to make it through most of reentry) [1] https://x.com/planet4589/status/1977917833825730792 https://x.com/planet4589/status/1977917833825730792
- ls612 1y ago
  There’s a very short period of time where if it exploded debris would fall on the African continent which is an unavoidable risk of orbital flight out of the US. Other than that it’ll either fall in the Atlantic or Indian Ocean.
- oskarkk 1y ago
  Yes, as after it leaves the atmosphere and achieves that 98% of orbital speed, its trajectory wouldn't change much even if it exploded - its engines are turned off after ascent that takes ~9 minutes, then it free-falls for an hour to the other side of the Earth. They target a spot in the Indian Ocean near the west coast of Australia (it's coming from the west). In case of explosion debris would fall to the ocean sooner, farther to the west from Australia. More dangerous part of the flight is ascent (when it gains that speed), as its ground path is near some Caribbean islands, and it can cause problems like on flight 7: > Around three minutes later, Ship 33 exploded over the Turks and Caicos Islands, causing debris to litter the Caribbean islands, Puerto Rico and the British Virgin Islands. While no injuries were reported, the debris caused minimal damage to infrastructure in Puerto Rico and the British Virgin Islands, and prompted airspace closures in the region for over an hour. The FAA ordered SpaceX to perform a mishap investigation into the breakup, grounding Starship until the inquiry was complete. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_flight_test_7#Mission_outcome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_flight_test_7#Mission...
  - indoordin0saur 1y ago
    It's fully orbital speed but the trajectory is steep enough such that it'll come back down in the Indian ocean whether they maintain control or not.
    - oskarkk 1y ago
      Technically, the trajectory of the last couple of flights is a transatmospheric orbit, meaning that if the Earth didn't have atmosphere, it would be an actual orbit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatmospheric_orbit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatmospheric_orbit
2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago
Are you going to say the same thing about their 500th suborbital test?
extraduder_ire 1y ago
They go above orbital velocity, they are avoiding an orbital trajectory.
ReptileMan 1y ago
A rapid unscheduled decomposition at that height will accelerate at least some junk into orbit.

dotnet00 1y ago

I think they're holding off on going fully orbital until the Ship engines are relatively stable (they try out different things with them almost every flight, and V3 has a significantly improved engine design too), tile losses are relatively under control and they're either ready to start testing Ship catches, or have tested them. Right now they're in a comfortable testing regime, getting up to near-orbital speed to be able to verify reentry in realistic conditions, while having the freedom to test dummy payload deployments and freedom to risk losing tiles since they will all definitely burn up or splash down within minutes of the ship reentry rather than floating around in orbit for some time. If they go orbital, they had better be sure they won't leave a ton of tiles behind, and that they will be able to perform a controlled deorbit.

stinkbeetle 1y ago
I think they'll start launching starlink v3 satellites pretty soon, before perfecting reentry let alone rapid reuse. They've demonstrated a zero-gravity engine re-light several times and deployed dummy sats twice, that's all they need to put real satellites in orbit. We could see it on the second or third launch of the block 3 rockets.
- dotnet00 1y ago
  I think the tile loss rate will still be important to them before that. Even in such low orbits, any tiles lost would take some time to come down (and might even survive all the way down). If they can make it so they only lose tiles when in a suborbital trajectory, they may be safe to begin deploying real Starlinks as soon as V3 has proven engine relight.
  - stinkbeetle 1y ago
    Oh, do you think so? I thought they're looking very good outside the atmosphere at least, although it's difficult to really tell. I'd be surprised if that holds things up but you could be right.
    - 1y ago