Starship V2 Flight 10.. a success.. - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: iMo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 28, 2025, 11:06:01 am
content: The Starship's V2 flight ended up with, imho, a success..Launching those 8 mockups of the Starlinks was a spectacular exercise, indeed..It landed in Orange colors, interesting..A recap with Scott..

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 28, 2025, 11:29:27 am
content: Sure, huge success. They could declare it operational now and start launching full size Starlink V2 sats, and at far lower cost than F9, even if they don't reuse the upper stage.But if they'd landed the upper stage it looked like it could probably be reused with not tooooo much refurbishment. If the flaps turn out to be a wear item for a few flights that probably isn't a big deal. Dunno what happened to the rear skirt though -- very strange event.

author: iMo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 28, 2025, 11:49:35 am
content: If there were no pipes with pressurized gases or liquids in that part it could be easily a hit by space debris flying around..

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 28, 2025, 03:44:25 pm
content: I guess I have mixed feelings about this. Yes, it is nice to see SpaceX succeed but it seems a lot like a rerun of stuff we did in the '60s. SpaceX is a few years away from walking on the Moon and we did that on July 20, 1969. Sure, the Saturn V wasn't reused but looking at the Starship damage, I wonder what the savings accrued to recycling actually amount to. Full disclosure, including disassembly, inspection, replacement parts, reassembly, labor and management, not just the cost of a pile of sheet metal.It is nice to see SpaceX apply the Thomas J. Watson (former CEO of IBM) approach to learning through failure. It's ok to fail but do it quickly, learn from it and move on.Google AI for "success is on the far side of failure"Google AI fpr "spacex learn through failure"This approach would be unworkable at NASA. In that regard, the Apollo program was truly a miracle.The SpaceX launch schedule is certainly ambitious.https://www.spacex.com/launches

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 28, 2025, 11:30:50 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on August 28, 2025, 03:44:25 pmThat's like saying a Zen 5 or Apple M4 is just a rerun of things we did in the 60s.In fact SpaceX is doing many things that everyone else, including NASA, believed to be impossible right up to the moment that SpaceX did them.QuoteWalking on the Moon in 1969 was a stunt that put true space exploration back by half a century.It was completely unsustainable. The entire program cost around $300 billion in today's dollars, with each extra flight costing around $2 billion.Today with the advanced pioneered by SpaceX a single wealthy individual such as Musk or Bezos can have a space program comparable to NASA in the 60s.QuoteComparing Saturn V and Starship is comparing totally different things -- a booster to an orbiter.SpaceX have been rapidly and cheaply reusing boosters for a number of years now. Today they flew (and landed) a Falcon 9 booster on its 30th flight.They have already reflown a SuperHeavy booster.I'm sure they inspected the early Falcon 9 boosters very carefully before reflying them. They do much less of that now -- maybe not quite on the level of a 747 pilot walking around under the plane before the next flight, but closer.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2025, 12:33:37 am
content: Quote from: brucehoult on August 28, 2025, 11:30:50 pmComparing Falcon 9 & Starship, they are quite different, too.Falcon 9, in its Dragon configuration, apart from the reusable booster, is pretty much a "Soyuz replacement".OK, in its other configurations, it can replace a number of dedicated satellite launchers, but it isn't near the "Swiss Army Knife" that Starship is envisaged to be:-Heavy lifter to LEO.Lunar Lander.Interplanetary mass transport to Mars & perhaps other places.Terrestrial passenger transport.Fully reusable (with fast turnaround).

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 29, 2025, 12:44:24 am
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on August 29, 2025, 12:33:37 amNot really. It's Soyuz + Progress replacement, and can take several times more cargo up and down too.

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2025, 12:49:10 am
content: There's one critical thing that sets Starship apart from everything that has come before it. SpaceX aren't building a new rocket, they're building a mass production line that builds cheap rockets. Production line rocket assembly has been done before but only in very small volumes (single digits) and not mass production to bring down cost. No one up to now has optimized cost down to make rockets a mass-production commodity.Currently the output of the SpaceX mass production factory is trash, just early factory production samples to test, blow up and get data from.There's also the whole reusability thin, but we all know about that.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2025, 04:04:56 am
content: Quote from: wraper on August 29, 2025, 12:44:24 amMy whole point is that Falcon 9 is very different to Starship so success in the former doesn't automatically translate to success in the latter.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2025, 04:07:52 am
content: Quote from: Psi on August 29, 2025, 12:49:10 amElon continues to quote very ambitious timelines, which "trash" may well not attain.

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2025, 05:33:01 am
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on August 29, 2025, 04:07:52 amIf SpaceX can pull of rapidly and fully reusable rockets and create a massive space industry I don't think anyone will care much that it took 2x,3x,4x longer than expected.New things always take longer than you expected due to unknown unknowns.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 29, 2025, 06:01:43 am
content: Quote from: Psi on August 29, 2025, 12:49:10 amExactly. People sometimes forget the fact that the Starship program is still in its developmental stage. That's the reason they deliberately do things they would never want to have crop up - like aggressive angle of attack manoeuvres, missing tiles or whatever - just to get a proper feel for the underlying forces at work in real world scenarios and collecting data for improved computer analysis and simulation. You learn a lot when things fail, so pushing things hard at this point offers opportunity to do just that.Nevertheless, Spacex really did need to have the success flight 10 has given them.