• @Lichtblitz@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    36 hours ago

    I think the average person gets it right. It’s a nice feat to catch the booster and it will save money. But that’s a side quest. The main quest of getting an actual load to orbit and beyond is still pretty far away. At least compared with the official time line where they wanted to achieve much more than that three years ago.

    • @frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      121 minutes ago

      It’s not just saving a little money. If this works, it will drop costs by another order of magnitude. Falcon 9 already dropped a zero, Starship will likely drop it by another zero even without this, and consistently being able to do this catch would mean another zero. That’s getting to $20/kg to LEO, vs $150/kg without it on Starship.

      That kind of cost will enable things that were completely infeasible before.

      • @Lichtblitz@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        112 minutes ago

        I didn’t say “a little” money. It may be important or critical for the business but from a technical perspective, demonstrating how it can safely being loads up and down decides whether the whole concept is actually feasible. That’s when people will start to get excited.

    • @Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      23 hours ago

      Um, no?

      The rocket has been to orbit twice now, they’ve already demonstrated that. They’re working on the bonus mission, landing everything and perfecting the hardware to the point where it doesn’t need major refurbishment between flights.

      • @Lichtblitz@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        137 minutes ago

        As far as I understood it, SpaceX uses the word “orbit” liberally. If it reaches the hight where an orbit would be possible, that’s “being in orbit” for them. In an actual orbit, the rocket would not fall back down again in an hour or so without active breaking. If my understanding is incorrect, I’m happy to be corrected. And even of that was achieved soon, it’s still all without demonstrating that the starship could actually carry a load and return it safely. Not even an inexpensive dummy load. All SpaceX is showing in their live feeds are empty cargo holds that fill up with hot gases and fumes during reentry.

        • @frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          17 minutes ago

          You’re not really wrong, but I think you are missing a few things. If you can get your rocket on a ballistic trajectory with a height above the Kármán line (~100km), then going into LEO from there is just a matter of having enough fuel. Nobody doubts that Starship could carry enough fuel to do that.

          They haven’t bothered doing that in testing yet, because they wouldn’t learn anything. Knowing how the heat shield survives reentry is far more important. The upper stage still hasn’t been able to come down in a safe, controlled manner yet. Test 4 managed to splash down, but the heat shield took a lot more damage than anybody is comfortable with (if you watch the videos of it, you’ll see why it was amazing it survived at all). This one was Test 5, and while the heat shield survived better, the upper stage blew up when it hit the water.