2 ms·

SpaceX's move-fast-and-break-things approach was lauded and NASA panned as being stuck in the past until <checks notes> the zeitgeist turned against Musk at whi

SpaceX's move-fast-and-break-things approach was lauded and NASA panned as being stuck in the past until <checks notes> the zeitgeist turned against Musk at which point the drones and tech blogs they read and write now view SpaceX as dangerous and wasteful at all costs. When a mere few years ago they couldn't shower them with enough praise. I have no skin in this game other than to say the old school methods resulted in a janky ship that stranded two astronauts in space for months until they could catch a ride home on a SpaceX ship.

XorNot 8mo ago
Starship is starting to be a very long and not so cheap project though that doesn't seem to be making significant iterative improvements - Rockets are still exploding regularly where you'd expect them to have moved beyond that phase.
- nine_k 8mo ago
  Sorry, what? Starship 11 proceeded with a totally nominal ascent, orbit, descent, and powered landing that would end up with it standing on the ground, were it not deliberately landed into water. What SLS currently has achieved had been achieved by Falcons and Dragons years ago, only way more cheaply and successfully. No matter what we may think about Mr Musk, SLS is dead end.
  - toraway 8mo ago
    I'm 99% confident Starship 11 was actually a sub-orbital test so you can't credit it for successfully entering orbit (my memory is confirmed by Gemini but caveat emptor).
    - DennisP 8mo ago
      They did reach orbital velocity though. If they'd aimed slightly differently they would have attained orbit, and reentry was as difficult as if they had done that.
    - hvb2 8mo ago
      Because when you're testing you put your rocket in an orbit that makes it reenter, but you can still show it has the performance to do it. They still need to show they can reliably relight the engines to deorbit. They're actually very good citizens there. Prove you can deorbit before putting anything in orbit

XorNot 8mo ago

Starship is starting to be a very long and not so cheap project though that doesn't seem to be making significant iterative improvements - Rockets are still exploding regularly where you'd expect them to have moved beyond that phase.

nine_k 8mo ago
Sorry, what? Starship 11 proceeded with a totally nominal ascent, orbit, descent, and powered landing that would end up with it standing on the ground, were it not deliberately landed into water. What SLS currently has achieved had been achieved by Falcons and Dragons years ago, only way more cheaply and successfully. No matter what we may think about Mr Musk, SLS is dead end.
- toraway 8mo ago
  I'm 99% confident Starship 11 was actually a sub-orbital test so you can't credit it for successfully entering orbit (my memory is confirmed by Gemini but caveat emptor).
  - DennisP 8mo ago
    They did reach orbital velocity though. If they'd aimed slightly differently they would have attained orbit, and reentry was as difficult as if they had done that.
  - hvb2 8mo ago
    Because when you're testing you put your rocket in an orbit that makes it reenter, but you can still show it has the performance to do it. They still need to show they can reliably relight the engines to deorbit. They're actually very good citizens there. Prove you can deorbit before putting anything in orbit