How has SpaceX managed to fail this many times in a row while achieving almost nothing but it's going to be worth more than Meta, Tesla, Saudi Aramco, and almost as much as TSMC? This thing was supposed to take humans to mars 2 years ago and has never once made it to orbit.
that one was supposed to explode
>>108899283why is everyone cheering lmao was it really expected to blow up wtf is going on?? i thought rockets blowing up was a bad thing
>>108899305>wtf is going on??What does it feel like being the bird?
>>108899290It fell over and exploded though
>>108899305>i thoughtStop doing that. You're not very good at it.
>>108899581>>108899755okay then why is it a good thing can some genius explain then huh
>>108899305>>108899747nta. They weren't trying to do a full landing, just the launch and a descent, which is why they dropped it in the ocean. It was a brand new revision of the Starship and it had to be destroyed for national security purposes because they weren't going to pay to go pick it up from the middle of the ocean. Space shit is heavily regulated.
>>108899786thanks anon
>>108899785There are basically two ways to engineer things: Overengineer it. Design design design. Test every component, then every subsystem, every system, and then test the final assembled product as much as possible before its first launch to ensure to the highest degree of what is humanly possible that the thing will just work on its first outing. This results in something that's super expensive to build and was super expensive to design and is overweight, and to correct these things involves taking some of that engineering out until things start to fail and now you're blowing up something that's very expensive in an attempt to make it not quite so very expensive.The other way is to underengineer things to start and just engineer solutions to the problems you encounter. This is faster and cheaper but your shit doesn't work... until it does.NASA uses the first type. Musk does the second. Musk goes beyond that and he designs the factory to build the thing as he's building the thing so he has an entire factory cranking out prototypes, and when the shit finally works he can crank out the working model. It's a VERY good way to do things if you're not burdened with the public perception of failure for your shit not working right out of the gate. This was a test flight of a new prototype and perfection was not designed in, the point is to find the problems so they can be fixed. It was also supposed to blow up.
>>108899283It is just the N-1 with wings. Starship is the most expensive firework/amateur rocket. USSR and USA would have scrub the project after the third failure. A returnable manned martian mission is still breakthroughs away. We need revolutions in propulsion, materials, energy storage/production technology to realistically attempt it.
>>108899786>because they weren't going to pay to go pick it up from the middle of the oceanThey literally have something out there to film it crashing into the Indian Ocean and exploding.
>>108899283>nooo you should be broke and poor like Nasa and only have 1 rocket and 40 years to prepare
>>108899283>>108899283its not worth that much, its a money black hole with chance for profitability (in this century)the IPO is overvalued af hypejob
>>108899786Even if that is true the rate of progress is incredibly unimpressive
what a dumb thread
>>108900073Compared to what? No one else is trying this.
>>108899833Thx
>indian oceansars please! this is working as to specs! all integration passing!
>>108900073underage who didn't grow up with all the concepts for the shuttle replacements that you never saw a single flight article
>>108899283This is the "wet roads cause rain" news story michael crichton was talking about. I thought he was being hyperbolic.
>>108899786Actshually I've seen photos of them recovering the second stage aft section from the indian oceanThe real reason it explodes is because the rocket soft landed in the ocean then fell over. No rocket is built to survive falling over because that's not part of any real mission. People here are complaining about the rocket equivalent of water landings destroying 747s, yeah no shit. These ocean ditchings are to test landing control for a tower catch in the future.
>>108900083Space X isn't even on track to being able to go to the moon
You're on /g/ and don't understand testing to failure? Why maximum limit data might be useful?
>>108900340How many years until Starship gets into orbit
>>1089003623 if they rush it by my guess, but I assume you mean full mission rating.
>>108899283>going to be worth more than Meta, Tesla, Saudi Aramco, and almost as much as TSMCstarlink provides wireless internet to exterminate goyim in ukraine and maybe more of europe
>>108900521And SpaceX makes less revenue than Kellogg and is unprofitable
>>108899283>but it's going to be worth more than Meta, Tesla, Saudi Aramco, and almost as much as TSMCBecause a bunch of traders with a couple millions push the price of "multi-billion" corporations. It's fake. The entire market is fake and has no liquidity.
It's not designed to land like that and be recovered, but this was a destructive test where recovery was never their intent, so letting it tip over and explode is perfectly fine.
This was basically a prototype that had never been tested before. If they had attempted to catch this thing and something (likely) went wrong with it (because it's a fucking prototype) then that would be a costly pad rebuild. So instead let it land in the fucking ocean and explode.
>>108899833Musk is designing a product that can never work.
>>108899747I'd like to make the point this isn't typical there's tons of these things going around seldom do they fall over into the ocean and explode
>>108899283Problem is the rocket itself. People think that being stuck to 200 years old "technology" is the way to interplanetary travel. Lol, not.
>>108899283>indian ocean>saarship
>>108899581birds are actually smart tho
>>108899851>manned martian missionthere's literally no point until we have a year-round manned lunar base
>>108900784Was this starship safe?
>>108899283Every failure teaches you something.
>>108899305Data, nigga. They got the data no one in the world have and would probably pay more in gold than what the rocket cost to get their hands on it.
>>108899967Cameras are small. Rockets are big. You can send out a ship to record that cant carry the rocket.
>>108899283The rocket falling down and the explosion symbolize Elon's penis surgery
>>108900362probably this year, maybe 2 flights from now. They just needed to demonstrate engine relight + reliable control of the vehicle. Raptor 2s were pretty reliable and that probably didn't get worse with raptor 3 or they would realize that on the test stand. The vacuum engine probably shit itself because of a plumbing issue that was created with starship V3. Vehicle control seems to be excellent. They unexpectedly got to test engine out conditions and it still nominally inserted and made it to the indian ocean target
>>108900801Starship is a moon/mars architecture as an aspirational benefit, but the first ladder rung it fills is reusable heavy lift for LEO. You can cheaply send robots to start bases and you can use starship to build any kind of big ass planetary ship you like.
>>108899833Also: in the early days of the space race, NASA used the first approach. There were tons of wrecks and explosions as they were working out details.
>>108900773And yet it keeps improving and improving.
>>108899786lmao, are you telling me it's regulation for them to leave their tech out there for any pajeet to pick up?
>>108902352The mars shit is ridiculous, not remotely practical. But moon not so much.
>>108899283space is fake
>>108901037They don't and never will understand how a TV works though. That's the point.
>>108900548Only unprofitable because they're going full retard into AI.
>>108900548>unprofitableSo was Amazon not too long ago. Some very smart and business-savvy people went on record multiple times saying Amazon would never be profitable.
>>108899283>in this test, we're going to test fire the ship + booster to see what happens, then blow them up when they land, so we're going to do it over water where we don't have to worry about the debris>ship hits the water and blows up exactly as it was supposed to>WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW BIG FAILURE?????????????????giving internet to brown people was a mistake
>>108899283>booster keels over and kills it's engines.>ship limps with an engine out>both unexpected>normies and the unwashed masses get distracted by the expected outcome because of an explosion and ignore the actual legitimate unexpected issues with the flightWell played SpaceX
Guise, you don't understand. We're just testing here, guise. It wasn't even supposed to get half-way this time, but we almost got to landing it! It's a miracle! I know Starship HLS contract is years behind schedule, but Musk-time, amirite?? Just keep giving Elon more taxpayer money for blowing up rockets to get extremely useful kaboom data! Mars is just a year away, just trust me bro! What do you mean we're literally burning money on already solved problems? Just think of space, bruh. Wew, so big. What if hoomans settle other planets!? Like wooah!
>>108903011Neither does the average educated adult human.
>>108902549Every company/institution starting out uses the second approach because it allows for fast iteration and quick production of semi-working prototypes which you can demonstrate to investors/congress when they ask "we gave you $X billion what do you have to show for it?" in order to secure the next level of funding. And every company/institution inevitably evolves into the second when lawyers get involved.
>>108899967>literally have somethingSome guy on a boat? You think they can just land a first stage rocket for a launch vehicle like that on some random boat? Is this bait?
>>108903113The AI rollup pisses me off so much. That could actually bankrupt them and they have no serious path to profitability. >Oh we'll rent the compute outYeah, the hyperscaler market is famous for it's high margins and potential for disruption.
>>108900256They're still doing better than Boeing and Blue origin. I think Elon's been a retard with a lot of stuff but somehow SpaceX is actually the best space company (I guess because that's such an absurd thing and no one can get more absurd than him?)
>>108902584that's why they blow it up. If India got their hands on those fuel pumps they could spray shit for miles
>>108899833>It's a VERY good way to do thingsNot really, no.
>>108902587Living to Mars or even the Moon is a pipe dream with our current tech. Space X is bread and games to distract you from the dystopia you are living in.
>>108900251Why don't we just land rockets sideways? That way they can't fall over.
>>108903912We're going to build a spaceship to escape the niggers.
>>108903927Would mean adding more thrusters or changing the geometry of the rocket to look like the space shuttle which is considerably more complex.
>>108903927or we could have them idle just a few feet off the ground.
>>108903896>t. retard
>>108903832You realize barges are a thing? And that these rockets can land with pinpoint positions? They knew where it was going to, hence they had a camera crew there to film the entire thing. Starship V3 didn't have the capability to land upright.
>>108905196You're retarded dude.Landing on a barge is way more dangerous than launching (which is already super dangerous).Plus the costs involved especially considering everyone involved needs to have a clearance to work around the ship.Just blow it up.
>>108899283trust the plan, i.e. shuffling taxpayer and 401k money into melon's pockets
>>108903896Powerful takedown. I'm convinced.
>>108899283It is unmanned, right?
>>108899283>This thing was supposed to take humans to mars 2 years ago and has never once made it to orbit.No that was the tesla robotaxihttps://youtu.be/1COvnSjLLw4?si=h7BALkCToC6DN9K4&t=83
>>108906033There were some jeets in it pedaling furiously but they are classified as components not people so technically no.
>>108899283>le epic contrarian Silicon Valley genius man brings software move fast and break things approach to rocketry to rapidly leap frog old stodgy rocketry incumbents using tax payer money>S-1 financials reveal the motherfucking ULA has better launch economics than SpaceXI want to say “the absolute state” but your retirement accounts will absolutely automatically buy this dogshit so Elon Musk will get away with it again. Sad!
Remember that guy who narrated live SpaceX launches that sounded 1:1 like Mike Stoklasa? Whatever happened to that guy?
