Space Travel & Exploration

[George]

Launch window open at 13:28 UTC.

[Nerraw]

Going live inside the next 10 minutes.

[Pann]

BOOM!

That was amazing whilst it lasted!

[Breccia]

At SpaceX headquarters, there is loud cheering nevertheless on the video feed. That the rocket got off the launchpad was a major success.

-- NYTimes live feed

[Pann]

There was a number of engines that didn't light, it will be interesting to see it this was intentional or a malfunction (there was a lot of debris thrown up and I wonder if this caused some damage).

Can't wait for the next attempt! Hopefully we won't have to wait too long.

[bledgor]

If watching that mammoth of a rocket take off doesn't give you chills you need to see a doctor, what a treat that was.

[PACOX]

That was a sight to see!


The fact that it held flew straight that long is impressive. At least 5 engines but possibly more by the time it started spinning.

The next most powerful rocket ever attempted didn't make it that far.

Now they have good data to work with for another attempt. And the pad didn't blow up so turnaround will be sooner rather than later.

[Nerraw]

A 120-meter tall skyscraper did how many tailspins without breaking apart. The structural integrity of Starship is NUTS.

[Edge-]

That was rad. Even with a few boosters unignited (and a few more going out) it had some damned power and even appeared to lose some tiles or something shortly after launch. Then those flips and flips and flips and boom.

I'm glad we got a big boom. I like big booms.

[Pann]

Oops... I'm sure it'll buff out.

https://twitter.com/FronteraSpacial/...61608952582146

[Edge-]

I hope someone is collecting footage of the damage following the debris following the big boom.

[Nerraw]

Oops... I'm sure it'll buff out.

https://twitter.com/FronteraSpacial/...61608952582146

Longer video of this: https://twitter.com/LabPadre/status/1649053476276797440

A lot of concrete got kicked up.

- - - Updated - - -

He actually just uploaded it to youtube, with sound and everything: https://youtu.be/thA8jlgcJ-8

[Pann]

Longer video of this: https://twitter.com/LabPadre/status/1649053476276797440

A lot of concrete got kicked up.

- - - Updated - - -

He actually just uploaded it to youtube, with sound and everything: https://youtu.be/thA8jlgcJ-8

That is amazing! I especially like that you see the engines ignite, then all hell breaks loose and once it all clears there's no sign of any rocket.

[Osmeric]

I hope these were older variety engines. This sort of reliability will not cut it.

[bledgor]

I hope these were older variety engines. This sort of reliability will not cut it.

It is, iirc they wanted to get this out just because it is quite dated compared to the newer starships.

[Pann]

Fuel storage tanks were damaged during the launch.



I don't know if there is a better way to suppress the blast from a rocket that generates that much energy or maybe they will end up having to move the launch pad further from anything that can be damaged.

- - - Updated - - -

I hope these were older variety engines. This sort of reliability will not cut it.

It's possible that they damaged by flying debris.

[PACOX]

It is, iirc they wanted to get this out just because it is quite dated compared to the newer starships.

They are indeed an older version but that's not the issue a lot of people are talking about. The engines are still the same at their.


Early speculation is that engines are interfering with one another - there too much internal vibration, hence further engine failure during ascent. The rocket was only at 90% throttle, most rockets actually operate above 100, the test rocket would have ripped itself apart if it operated at nominal thrust.


Another clear issue was it's staging. The booster failed to properly separate from the top half. It wasn't going to properly separate even if all the engines were intact.


They probably could have tested the flop maneuver more considering it barely worked last time they tested without a booster attached it but why not just test the entire stack at once I guess.


Starship is a very complicated machine and they are asking a lot from it it at once. It really is a feat of engineering that the thing got as high as it did during it's first attempt and the engineers should be proud.

They obviously have a lot of work to do. This puts things into perspective for a lot of people who thought SpaceX was above the normal processes of rocket development. SpaceX knows this, not sure if some of its fans or even Musk does. They just found out though.

Too early to call anything now but it's possible might shelve it's goals for a reusable booster in favor of reliable launches. It's not like F9 started out as a completely reusable rocket at first.

- - - Updated - - -

Fuel storage tanks were damaged during the launch.



I don't know if there is a better way to suppress the blast from a rocket that generates that much energy or maybe they will end up having to move the launch pad further from anything that can be damaged.

- - - Updated - - -



It's possible that they damaged by flying debris.

The lack of flame trenches and water suppression is weird. Not sure if there was some kind of prior justification for it or Musk was just trying to cut cost. SLS only put out half the thrust of Starship and did a number on its launch platform with a flame trench and water suppression. Someone in charge thought it was a good idea to place the most powerful rocket next to a bunch of infrastructure not designed to hold up next to it.


The launchpad Starship would be using at KSC is A LOT stronger though.

[jonnysensible]

these rockets seem about as reliable and well made as a tesla

[Nerraw]

I hope these were older variety engines. This sort of reliability will not cut it.

The whole stack was (relatively) ancient, both Ship 24 and Booster 7 had been around for a year and a half or longer.

[George]

What an impressive launch! I hope they gathered enough data to make significant improvements and can't wait to see the next one.