Watch - SpaceX Starship prototype explodes on landing

Dave said:
You should know by now that when @eg2505 enters a thread logic and understanding tend to leave it...
Click to expand...

Yeah I do but sometimes he still manages to surprise me at the absolute lack of logic and understanding he brings to the table.
 
eg2505 said:
maybe we measure "success" differently then,

if its the 10th they have blown up, what happened to the last 9?
also "successes", I guess then?
maybe that works for the ANC, but I doubt for Spacex.

point is, if its fails, its bad, why is this so hard to understand,
or their aren't any perfectionists at spacex,

or does Elon simply not care, their will be another Hundred "starships" and another few billions,
who cares if this one turns into scrap metal.

here is another "success"
look at the tiny microscopic country that launched a probe to the Moon, wow, there so smart, NOT.
en.wikipedia.org

SpaceIL - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...

Oh my word! You do know that Elon himself gave the SN8 1 in 3 chance of landing without a hitch, two weeks prior to the launch?

https://www.businessinsider.co.za/s...igh-altitude-test-scheduled-2020-11?r=US&IR=T

Elon Musk said in a follow-up tweet on Wednesday that lots could go wrong in this first high-altitude test. "Lot of things need to go right," the billionaire said. When asked on Twitter what he thought the odds were of Starship landing in one piece, he answered "1-in-3."
Click to expand...
 
LoL, someone doesn't know what its like to be innovative and on the bleeding edge of technology. You are going to make mistakes and you will learn a great amount from it. That is the goal not to never make a mistake and take 10x as long to get to your goals.
 
To quote this Slashdot post

Consider:
This flight was powered by 3 Raptor engines. Raptor engines are very unique - they burn Methane and LOX and do it with great efficiency; they were designed to use methane (not usually used in rocketry) because methane can be made from the Martian atmosphere without too much trouble and Musk has been doggedly following his plans to get humanity a way to move back and forth between Earth and Mars. [1] No vehicle has ever been flown before with more than 1 Raptor. [2] No Raptor has ever lifted any vehicle more than several hundred feet into the air.

This flight was the first of a Starship prototype to be equipped with the upper 1/3 of the stage (the payload section) and with all four fins.

This was the highest flight and longest duration flight for any Starship prototype.

This was the first time a Starship shut down all engines in flight and maneuvered into its belly-flop/skydiver reentry attitude.

This was the first time a Starship ever fell in skydiver attitude and used its four flappers like a skydiver's arms and legs to steer and control attitude while falling.

This was the first time any Raptor engine has ever been re-started in flight, (and without any ground support equipment attached) and it was done using the header tanks rather than the mains tanks (similar to the tanking system used on aerobatic aircraft, and a way of getting weightless fuel into an engine while the vehicle is falling). Most 1st stage rocket engines cannot be restarted in flight - the ones on the Space Shuttle were incapable of it, just like the ones on the Saturn, Delta, Atlas, SLS, Ariane, and Soyuz rockets.

This was the first time a Starship has re-oriented itself back into the vertical from the skydiver attitude in flight.

This flight of Starship prototype #8 achieved ALL of these objectives before arriving at the landing pad with too much vertical velocity. This was insanely successful and proved that the entire flight profile, the hardware, the flight algorithms etc are ALL good and the entire scheme WILL work - all that's needed is some software tweeks and the next prototype will probably nail it. This thing so nearly completed the list of test objectives that it completed its rapid unscheduled disassembly right on the landing pad - that's breathtakingly successful for this sort of wildly complex test flight and my hat's off to the entire SpaceX team.

Oh, and Musk assumed he'd lose this vehicle on this flight - vehicle number 9 is essentially ready to go, and several more are in various stages of assembly - I would not be surprised if #9 rolled to the pad within days.

Colonies on the moon, and Man on Mars, just became a MUCH more real thing today, as did a FAR more connected Earth. If you witnessed that test flight today, then you saw something that will go down in history as a far more significant event than Chuck Yeager's 1947 flight - this will revolutionize spaceflight and even transport on Earth; while all the other companies are trying to send 2 to 4 people to the moon on throw-away rockets in exchange for billions of tax dollars, Musk laid the groundwork for people to go to the Moon and Mars in groups of 100, Satellites to be launched hundreds at a time, and for people to fly Earth-to-Earth routes like Sydney-to-London or Paris to Los Angeles or Tokyo to New York in 90minutes.

If you are an executive at Boeing or Lockheed and you are not freaking out right now, you need your head examined (and your shareholders need to fire you before your company gets so far behind that it cannot avoid becoming as obsolete as a maker of chain mail for draft horses).
Click to expand...
 
eg2505 said:
maybe we measure "success" differently then,

if its the 10th they have blown up, what happened to the last 9?
also "successes", I guess then?
Click to expand...

I told you... They blew up! A couple on purpose but most were failures actually.

What's weird though is that each new prototype built is more advanced and capable than the previous model, it's like somehow they're learning from the failures and iterating the design accordingly or something.

It's actually given me an idea for the thesis for my masters, build prototypes fast, see what doesn't work and pivot the design rapidly. Got a great title for it too, "Fail Fast, Fail Often".

What do you think @eg2505 ?
 
ScottulusMaximus said:
I told you... They blew up! A couple on purpose but most were failures actually.

What's weird though is that each new prototype built is more advanced and capable than the previous model, it's like somehow they're learning from the failures and iterating the design accordingly or something.

It's actually given me an idea for the thesis for my masters, build prototypes fast, see what doesn't work and pivot the design rapidly. Got a great title for it too, "Fail Fast, Fail Often".

What do you think @eg2505 ?
Click to expand...

No!...

Fail Fast, Fail Forward.

Its more 2020's.
 
eg2505 said:
catchy title, if what your designing is a USB drive that is also a rechargeable electric toothbrush.
a Billion USD rocket, not so much imo.
Click to expand...

Why not...

surely a USB drive that is a rechargeable electric toothbrush is a considerably more deadly device if the device is designed incorrectly?
 
ToxicBunny said:
No!...

Fail Fast, Fail Forward.

Its more 2020's.
Click to expand...

Now that's a winner!


eg2505 said:
a Billion USD rocket, not so much imo.
Click to expand...

Yeah I get you, I mean why would anyone risk a massive 0.5%-1% of their company on R&D:

Morgan Stanley increased its base case model for SpaceX’s valuation to $101 billion, up from $52 billion previously. The firm also slightly increased its bull case – the scenario where the company exceeds expectations – valuation to $203 billion, up from $175 billion before. Thirdly, it’s bear case valuation also increased to $5.4 billion, up from just $200 million before.
Click to expand...
 
This forum needs a BS or Dumb button for a certain type of post...

1607610004147.jpegI'm sure I've seen it on other xenforo forums.
 
Failure = data for improvement and refinement. SN8 showed the entire concept is entirely viable and was a HUGE success. You can model all you want, but need the real world data to see how things truly work out

They are building SN16 already. Just check the progression in welding quality from the first prototype and compare that to the ones they are rolling out now.

Oh, that green exgaust is known as 'engine rich exhaust' which means the engine is devouring itself during the burn.
 

It's difficult to pick up the joke when the majority of responses to this are poking at Elon and see it as a failure.

So my bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X