3 ms·
They've blown up 11 Starships without any of them making it to orbit. Artemis I flew around the moon and came back already. And don't compare costs because Sta
by 2OEH8eoCRo0 8mo ago
They've blown up 11 Starships without any of them making it to orbit. Artemis I flew around the moon and came back already.
And don't compare costs because Starship does not and may never work so I dont care how much cheaper it is. If we are comparing fictional rockets I have a $1 rocket that can fly to Jupiter.
- bhouston 8mo ago> They've blown up 11 Starships without any of them making it to orbit. They purposely were not trying for orbit from my understanding. The last one did orbit the earth at suborbital heights and release satellites. It did seem to do what they wanted it to do, it wasn't a failure.
- delichon 8mo agoNot only were they not trying to reach orbit, they are specifically trying to do risky things that they can learn from. It's not exactly destructive testing because they hope to succeed, but it's close.
- UltraSane 8mo agoThat just seems like a huge waste of money
- qingcharles 8mo agoElon Musk's net worth now (sadly) near a trillion dollars... :/
- delichon 8mo agoHe is spending it effectively to colonize the sky. That makes him the MVP of the whole biosphere.
- delichon 8mo agoIt wouldn't if you were scheduled to fly on it.
- NetMageSCW 8mo agoBy the time people are scheduled to fly on it, it will have launched 100s of times and SLS wilk have launched once. Which so you want to ride on?
- elictronic 8mo agoEach Expendable Starship Super Heavy launched costs less than a single engine on the Artemis program. Every time you see a Starship launch what you aren't seeing is manufacturing processes corrected, issues in launch protocols and field issues resolved. All the little things that build up to make your system reliable. Do you want the doctor who has done a hundred successful surgeries, or the one who has done one or two but spent a long time in school watching videos. The big difference is in the end, Starship gets built faster, costs much less, and can do more. It's not even close.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 8mo agoYou can't compare costs for a rocket that doesn't work yet. It's fictional. As I said in my post, if we are comparing fictional rockets then I have a $1 rocket that can fly to Jupiter.
- signatoremo 8mo agoOf course you can. It wasn’t fictional when Superheavy flew back and was caught, was it? It costed real money, not fictional. What kind of mental gymnastics are you doing?
- NetMageSCW 8mo agoThat sounds a lot like the infamous paper rocket comment about Falcon Heavy versus SLS being a real rocket. Meanwhile Falcon Heavy has launched something to the orbit of Mars, launched multiple (including NASA) missions to space and SLS has orbited the moon once with multiple problems.
- UltraSane 8mo agoUntil it actually works every dollar is waste.
- NetMageSCW 8mo agoDo you think that about cancer research, or antibiotic research, or development of the JWT?
- verzali 8mo agoI doubt they set out to launch eleven times without reaching orbit.
- ThrowawayTestr 8mo agoThey very explicitly were not setting out for orbit for most of them.
- verzali 8mo agoYes, but if you asked someone at SpaceX before flight 1 where they would be by flight 11, I doubt they would have been happy about the reality.
- ThrowawayTestr 8mo agoAnd?
- bpodgursky 8mo agoNot a single one of them had reaching stable orbit in the flight plan.
- freejazz 8mo agoEasy not to fail when you are purposefully not trying to succeed
- ThrowawayTestr 8mo agoThis is why NASA can never adopt the SpaceX philosophy. People don't understand the concept of test fight.