Flight 12 EditionPrevious >>16980552
Version 4 will fix this!>Version 4 will fix this!Version 4 will fix this!>Version 4 will fix this!Version 4 will fix this!>Version 4 will fix this!Version 4 will fix this!>Version 4 will fix this!Version 4 will fix this!>Version 4 will fix this!Version 4 will fix this!>Version 4 will fix this!Version 4 will fix this!>Version 4 will fix this!Version 4 will fix this!>Version 4 will fix this!Version 4 will fix this!>Version 4 will fix this!Version 4 will fix this!>Version 4 will fix this!
flight 13 when
unfortunate.
>>16984893Not a meaningful question. Could be as short as one month within the same block launch.
>/sfg/ - /sfg/ fatigue general
>>16984895YES YOU FUCKING GENIUS THAT IS LITERALLY HOW ITERATIVE DEVELOPMENT WORKSyou people keep saying “HAHA VERSION 4 WILL FIX IT???” like you’ve uncovered some devastating contradiction instead of describing the entire point of prototype generationsV3 is not the sacred final immutable spaceship handed down from heaven. it’s a test article. they change engines, plumbing, tiles, avionics, structural sections and flight profiles practically every launch because they are still learning what breaks under real conditionsthat is why there is a V4you are acting shocked that experimental aerospace hardware is experimental because internet debunker culture has convinced half this board that every prototype failure is evidence of a scam instead of the normal process of developing absurdly difficult technology
>>16984904Stop feeding it (You)s.
what are we iterating towards
>ROLL UP: FLIGHT 13 OF THE 1 FLIGHT SUBORBITAL TEST FLIGHT OPERATION
my guess is flight 13 NET september
>>16984910but cadence
>>16984910Optimistic: end of June.Realistic: end of July.Pessimistic: August.
https://x.com/mcrs987/status/2058242930788159653>Preliminarily matching up the ship trajectory with all the information I have is showing me a much more streamlined trajectory compared to Flight 11. Going to have to remake the RTLS simulation.>Flight 11 intentionally stressed it more and clearly did a sharper bank
>>16984914Delulu: end of June.Optimistic: end of July.Realistic: August.Pessimistic: 2027.
Thinking about it, it's actually awe inspiring that they have spent 12 full scale rockets without reaching the first milestone.
>>16984922That's iterative development
>>16984922don't forget the starship hop tests that took up 2 years of development too.
>headline: flight was a disaster>article: flight was amazinghttps://arstechnica.com/space/2026/05/spacexs-starship-v3-still-a-work-in-progress-mostly-successful-on-first-flight/?????
>>16984931You do not hate editorial boards enough.
>>16984906Orbit, NET 2027
>>16984904based and true genuine response.
>>16984922>reaching the first milestonethe first milestone was to see if flipping a second stage at the last moment after scrubbing off everything but it's terminal velocity was even possible, anon.they've already gone through many many milestones, most of which have never been done by anyone else ever in the history of mankind.
oh yea, he's definitely trying to breed her
https://x.com/ENNEPS/status/2058198634219348156>A side by side look at the the launch of Starship flight 11, the final launch on Pad 1 and Starship flight 12 the first launch of the new and improved pad, engines, and vehicles.
>>16984942that is an AI image. Stop posting AI slop you twat.
>>16984943What was the point of v2
>>16984947Continuing the R&D side of the program, particularly the heat shield side, while waiting on Raptor 3.
with a small raptor 3 revision, V3 will be perfect.prove this statement wrong.
>>16984943i knew that bitch got off the pad crazy fast
qrd?
>>16984951Seething ex-SpaceX lefty got mad about the current SpaceX employees chanting USA! USA! USA!
>>16984951not really a dogwhistle is it? more of an actual whistle.
>>16984951They have been chanting since forever.
>>16984951If the chinese were to stream a launch of a vehicle as influential as this you bet your ass you're gonna hear their anthem on the stream
>>16984958Source?
So if starship tips on the moon/mars it will fucking explode like a firecracker?
>>16984973not a problem. v4 will fix this.
Zero maintenance after fucking orbital reentry is physically impossible. The whole point is getting it down to economically feasible maintenance (cost and time).
>>16984922What do you believe the first milestone is?
>>16984922>>16984909>'Orbital Launch Test'>'Q2 2022'
>>16984975water touching the hot tiles when it tipped over instantly vaporized and caused a steam explosion which ultimately caused the ship failure and explosion.starship is more than capable of surviving a tip over in 1/6 moon gravity
>>16984942this is an AI generated image.
soon
>>16984951>loving your country is a dogwhistle
current spaceflight isnt really comparable to early aviation. early aviation had tons of money pouring into it from all over the place. its hard as fuck to get money into spaceflight.
>>16984943total gravity losses death. roundhouse kick gravity losses. curb stomp pregnant black gravity losses. slam dunk a gravity losses baby in a trashcan. slice gravity losses in half with a katana.
>>16984990report gravity losses to the DOD
>>16984981Source? Or are you just making things up for your entertainment.
In the 60s and 70s propulsive landing on Earth was deemed unfeasible due to high gravity losses, but now it is allegedly better than gliding return. what changed?
>>16984973tip-over is generally game over for any mission. The idea always is avoiding the tip in the first place
>>16984987my wife is so fucking pretty
>>16984999Starship can tip a little bit if it wants to.
>>16985004cant believe that was 30 starships ago
>>16984943I'm guessing the idea is to beat the shit out of the launchpad, but for a shorter duration of full-on impact
>>16984904I think V4 is more for increased performance by stretching the ship more and perhaps adding 3 more vac engines but if there aren't some fundamental problems with the current v3, then I think this version should be operational and start deploying some payloads on so on
>>16984951YOU ESS AYYOU ESS AYYOU ESS AY
>>16984987honestly, it must be rad looking at this fucking thing knowing it only exists because you made it happen
>>16984942
>>16985016AI will only get better. We are completely fucked. Won't be able to believe anything we see online.
>merges debt ridden XAI and twitter with SpaceX>buys Tesla products using SpaceX money>now IPOs SpaceX to wash all debt away>sets up super shares that make investors into little cucks who can't question his leadership>as a cherry on top forces boomer pension funds to pump his stock by going straight to the NasdaqHE CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT
on a big enough fleet, some tile refurbishing can be absorbed into the general rotation of flights and the routine maintenance of each ship.
>>16985022>>sets up super shares that make investors into little cucks who can't question his leadershipLiterally the smartest thing he has ever made. Modern shareholders are leeches and vultures and will destroy a company the moment they have the leeway to do so.
>>16984895Blackpillers are desperately flailing at Flight 12's success.
>E2E starshipno>superheavy launching 4+ mini shuttles at the same time, each arriving at different E2E destinationsyes
>>16985022You left out the part where SpaceX is getting more than $1 billion a month to do AI compute for other companies.
>>16985020won't be long
>>16985028Literally decades before it reaches anything close to FAA approval
boring company posted a thing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YY2mW1SrTVI
>>16985028You're thinking too small Person sized pods with parachute landing ejected along the way for maximum route coverage
Reminder that Starship is definitely going to be able to launch and recover dozens of rockets just to refuel one single rocket in orbit and nothing will go wrong in the process of launching dozens of them in a short timeframe and they are definitely going to be able to test and land the HLS on the moon by next year, yep it's definitely going to happen Elon has NEVER lied before about any of this or delayed anything, nope he is 100% a truth teller that never has lied or missed a deadline EVER! Anti Musk shills BTFO!
whatever happened to ass to ass refueling?
>>16985044Dolphin mating was deemed hotter
>>16985044>>16985045Should have been tip to tip
>>16985047too homoerotic
>>16985048and the spaceship equivalent of frotting isn't?
why not tip to ass like aircraft?
>>16985029and still losing money.
>>16984906A surprisingly philosophical question
>>16985050remember what comes out of its ass
>>16985050Through the header tanks? You sick fuck
>>16985055propellant?
After the humungous dissapointment of yesterday I have gone through the entire cycle of grief, and I now see the silver lining that at least it wasnt as bad as it could have possibly been. We were quite lucky that the catastrophic failure of one of the Rvacs didnt result in a cascade failure like on other flights or even on the superheavy. thank goodness it at least completed the flight profile that was completed 9 flights ago.
>>16984992bro cmon look at that rocket model on the table and the ui on the tv in the background
>>16985063Use the real photo.
>>16985004some rough math says this is in the ballpark of falling all the way over on Ceres
>>16984942wtf tyrone gon do?
>>16985064the one which is desaturated compared to the others to push a fake narrative which will be disproven as soon as high res footage is released
>>16985070>My doctored image is the truth!ISHYGDDT
>>16984942>I-I showed you my r-rocket, now show me yours... *nods awkwardly*
>>16984892Why do y'all want to go to space, if there's nobody to talk to?
>>16985086news sites should be banned from having opinion sections and sensationalist headlines. just stick to the facts.
>>16985086
Are we going orbital this year?
>>16985064color saturation is not color correction anon, the color palette you have picked is literal fanfiction.
>>16985093It'd be really retarded if they didn't go orbital in the next 2 flights
>>16985095meant for >>16985063
>>16985063WOW, THE HEAT SHIELD IN FLIGHT 12 LOOKS IMMACULATE.
What exactly could we do with a moonbase? Besides it just being cool (which it is), what would be the purpose of something so expensive and difficult to maintain?
>>16985104If you want cheap access to in-space construction materials, you can't beat a lunar mass driver for cost of delivery. Anyone who wants to build something like a space habitat basically needs to build a moon base first.
>>16985106you arent just mining the material, you would need to have factories on the moon to turn regolith into useful materials. Not happening within this century and possibly not the next.
>>16985104Science experiments mostly
>>16985109dropping a feather and a hammer? wow. much science.
I'm glad that V2 was at least able to deliver 100 tons to orbit and proving the doubters wrong before being discontinued.
>>16985108As long as the materials are industrially ready for use, that's plenty.
>>16985100Is there sound for this?If so, could you post it in the /swg/ spaceflight thread and crosspost it?
Cancel Starship.
>>16985055>Not right now you don't
the staging event is a continuous source of problems. spacex need to do an ssto
>>16985126There is but it's not that great. Pic unrelated.
>>16985086That's a different problem to solve later.
>>16985142looks like a pic from a fusion reactor
>>16985108It should not have to take a couple of centuries to get the money to start that.
So with IFT12 going pretty smoothly, is flight 13 a booster or ship catch?
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/2058305552866775118
>>16985152The booster catch attempt needs a successful demo of a controlled descent into a hover. Ship catch attempts are held up by a successful orbital relight demo, to prove that the ship is controllable in orbit first.
>>16985148>>16985147>>16985144honestly Starlink is more of a technological achievement than the actual space program
>>16985147This reminds me. I'm glad they have finally figured out the Dim Todd hot gas thrusters. Ship seemed very controlled during the flight.
>>16984942real and factual image (artist's impression)
other companies are shitting bricks now that starship can deploy satellites
I hope Elon doesn't burn coal.
>>>/wsg/6155753
>>16985179
>>16985181god please make starship work.
>>16985181i have never seen clouds vibrating before
>>16985181Democrats will protect the wildlife against evil Felon Musklers ultrasonic nazi waves produced by the billionaire joyride idiot phallus thing after winning elections in 2028.[math]\unicode{x270A}[/math][math]\unicode{x270A}[/math][math]\unicode{x270A}[/math]
>>16984943Looks out of sync
>>16985142>>16985144>>16985147>have headache>see this>no more headacheThe aft one has to be edited right?
>>16985192you kid, but imagine the (increasingly likely) world where starship still has not acheived the minimum criteria for use, and then an anti musk regime stops testing. its been 3 years and we only have 2 more.
>>16985192>protect the wildlife
>>16985194>The aft one has to be edited right?Probably color graded and some saturation adjustment. Looks incredible though.
>>16985142SEX
>>16985153Looking great!
>>16985063>>16985064so let me get this straight. They want to send one of these to orbit (which they still haven't achieved) with a large payloadThen, they have to send another one up, and it also has to make orbit with a payload. Then the second ship has to rendezvous with the first and they have to orient themselves in order to to an orbital refuel, something never been done before in history of spaceflight, transfer pressurized, volatile fuel from one spacecraft to another. Then the second ship has to return to Earth, land, and be refueled and put on another booster to them repeat the process, while another rocket has to take off and be sent to orbit again to put more fuel in the first rocket, and this has to be done like what, a dozen times just to fuel up one single rocket with its massive payload enough so that it can have enough fuel to actually escape LEO and be put on a trajectory to the moon or mars and beyond. Am I getting this right? and people honestly, unironically believe that Artemis II, III and IV are definitely on schedule to happen in the next what, 2 years?I get that Blue Origin is their second option, but even Blue Moon is no where near on schedule either, none of this shit makes any sense to me at all.
>>16985142>NASA and turd worlders turning up saturation bad>SpaceX turning up saturation goodUnironically this
>>16985207>none of this shit makes any sense to me at all.95% of any orbital insertion by weight is fuel burn. Either you can make your rocket enormous to carry a very tiny amount of stuff to your destination and make everything one-time use, or you can send up more fuel later.
>>16985207Delays happen, big deal
>>16985207>making orbit is something you have to ""achieve"" because it's le difficult or somethingMaking orbit is the easy part, you just run the engines for another 4 seconds. Kepler's laws of motion. You can stop pretending to be a retard at any time.>Then the second ship has to return to Earth, land, and be refueled and put on another booster to them repeat the processThis will be streamlined using an on orbit depot.
>>16985207>none of this shit makes any sense to me at allnatural consequence of being or pretending to be retarded
>>16985207>none of this shit makes any sense to me at allthank god smarter people are running US spaceflight. 2027 is still realistic.
>>16985209Ok, I get that, but what is the cost of each launch, and how does the cost not balloon to billions when you have to launch giant rocket after giant rocket after giant rocket, all while claiming you're going to recover them and re-launch them again in a short window just to get your giant rocket out of earth orbit? Maybe this entire plan is just fucking retarded and we should just continue sending small to medium size payload robots and shit to the moon / mars to do scientific research, which is far more cost effective. The entire plan to send a bunch of meatbags around the solar system is just flawed from the start, and way too expensive especially since technology has advanced so much in the past 3 decades in robotics and computerization. It just makes no sense to send mankind anywhere anymore and all you're doing is egotistical dick measuring contest to do something we already did in the 1960s and 70s. Just completely pointless. I'd actually respect Elon if he just said I'm going to build a bunch of robots and send them to the moon and mars to do science shit, collect samples, return them to Earth for study, see if samples contain signs / traces of life on Mars, etc. Stuff that actually matters, not this retarded space colonization bullshit while the Earth burns.
>>16985213>2027 is still realistic.They're "smarter" in that they know how to lie to your face, and you're dumb enough to eat it up. SpaceX and Blue Origin are no where near ready and the entire Artemis mission hinges on them being ready, and they won't be. It's a 100% guarantee, you can screencap this or whatever, SpaceX and Blue Origin will NOT land HLS / Blue Moon on the lunar surface in the next 2 years. Artemis IV is literally scheduled for 2028, less than 2 years from now. Please don't tell me you unironically believe that it's going to happen in that timeframe. It will be a miracle if this shit isn't delayed until 2030 or later.
>>16984951SpaceX actually sides with this sentiment
>>16985207It probably won't happen in just two years but docking in space is now well established tech and transferring fuel in space isn't that different from doing so on earth.The real obstacle is making starship reusable, after that launching it several times won't be difficult.
>>16985214Your mistake is in presuming that Starship is expensive, let alone billions of dollars expensive. Even at low rate production, an entire vehicle stack is about $100 million. If they flew fifteen of them once, that's $1.5 billion in rockets. With reuse, amortization, and other costs factored in, the per-flight cost may be a much more reasonable $20 million. At that point, flying a smaller rocket like Falcon 9 offers no cost advantages in any context.
>>16985214NTA but I have been saying that by SpaceXes own optimistic numbers Artemis will prove to be more costly and less sustainable than Apollo which is hugely ironic. 100 million per launch, which is the absurdly optimistic Elon figure you should take with a humungous silo of salt, means that for the expected mission profile of 19 launches total, 1 depot 1 HLS 17 tankers, you would be spending close to 2 billion. thats not counting 1 billion for SLS. that is the entire HLS development contract in 1 pop.
>>16984973There's no air in space for it to burn
>>16985226FYI the real cost is closer to 1 billion per launch so far because SpaceX has spent about 15 billion in development for 12 flights.
>>16985229so when the common dome ruptures the oxygen and methane will just mix and be fine. gotcha.
>>16985217I'm notscreencapping your deluded statements just becuase youe a troll who wants attention.
why are some people like this?
>>16985231This is technically correct in the most moronic and least informative way possible. They're also building two fuckoff-giant rocket factories, paying for the R&D program, and pre-ordering/building like eight launch pads or some shit for that money, and running payroll for everyone involved. The incremental cost of one vehicle is a comparatively quite small fraction of that.
>>16985224>not made on a beach by mexicanscringe
>>16985236is there anything they said that was wrong?
>>16985022>sets up super shares that make investors into little cucks who can't question his leadershipInvestors should never be allowed to control a company. Don't like what they are doing then sell faggot, being allowed to vote on decisions is retarded.
>just finding about about EUSPA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Agency_for_the_Space_Programme>it handles the EU's satellite navigation, earth observation, and secure communicationsso its like the temu version of the US space force?
The flight 12 liftoff keeps making me smile because it's so fun watching that thing haul absolute ass off the pad.Same thrust to weight ratio as SLS.
>>16985239>not using TomorrowNGMI
>>16984943can someone calculate the respective acceleration?
>>169852554chan is supposed to hurt your eyes
>>16985261flight 12 is so revolutionary I propose a change to the rocket equation to acount for it. delta-v = v_e * ln(m_0 / m_f) + AI
>>16985263I can respect that viewpoint
>>16985267can you respect me for the person I am?
need that fucking flight 13 to go perfectly so we can get orbital this year
>>16985276not on your life, jackass. V4 will fix this.
>>16985241yes
>>16985265funnycan you plug in the numbers? Id do it but im phonefagging on a bad connection
>>16985273what are you, gay?
>>16985251When I first saw V3 I still believed there had to be some type of concession to dry mass somewhere in the booster.If there is you can't fucking tell.V3 stack just looks so much more aggressive on takeoff.Really puts into perspective how much of a pig NG is
I get that they're not trying to catch the booster/ship because they fear the pad might be destroyed if the landing fails, so why not build a separate tower far away without a pad, exclusively for catching, even if they don't intend to reuse the stages? I feel like they're wasting precious post-flight Intel by letting the rocket crash into the ocean, they could dissect it to investigate how exactly it is affected by the re-entry
>>16985284NG just uses engines running at 70% of their max capability because BO believe this is the secret to making them highly reusable. Maybe they are right. SpaceX hasnt even gotten near the point trying to fly raptors multiple times, but they will probably be a bitch. Especially considering you physically cannot service a raptor 3.
The anon who played with the colors in order to make S39 look worse off is really eating crow.
>>16985236>THEY HAVE THE SAME VOTING POWER!So what? Stop holding elections to save democracy?
>>16985287building catch pads take more time than building boosters
>>16985207The midwits really don't understand how much they out themselves by chanting "orbit" like a mental salve.
>>16985288So far NG hasn't reused any enginesNG-3 swapped out all the engines from NG-2
>>16985288Blue is running their engines at lower thrust because they are not confident in them.
>>16985286daaamn looks rusty as fuck on god
>>16985297get this man to the infirmary
>>16985296Jeff explicitly stated his strategy is to run a good engine below performance to make it reusable. Maybe he is lying but i dont see it. There are no hints that BE4 has reliability problems.
do we think starship will make it for artemis 3 next year?
>>16985276They just need to land the booster every flight already so they can stop using their build time as a cope for how long it takes them to relaunch.
>>16985297Not great, not terrible
>>16985302If Musk stops stalling and locks the fuck in, which he won't, then yes. At the peak of starship development we had only about a month before each flight. We just need to get to high cadence after the absolute fucking disaster that was Pad B and V3
>>16985307stacking fast only helps if the hardware is actually ok. It is locked in nowthat the heat shield doesn't work, so best possible case scenario all the bullshit we saw aside from that can be fixed with software changes and then spacex just brute forces hls by having 17 separate tanker ships ready. unlikely but possible if he digs deep.
color corrected
>>16985309holy shit. starshipsisters....
>>16985309It's completely rusted and pixelated (melted). It's completely rainbow which is badified. This is bad
>>16985287it's not that easy in catchingtowery, it takes a very long time to just build one
>>16985309Still some ambiguity in there. We need to go further.
>>16985179Thank you for the sound, anonMagnificent
>>16984922>flew another into the Indian ocean awardkek, another 8 years of this
china is supposed to launch astronauts to their space station sometime today
>>16985320why don't they fly them to the Indian ocean like the big dogs?
>>16985104>what would be the purpose of something so expensive and difficult to maintain?
>>16985320How long before we start cucking out and begging to join their one country space station? They keep adding modules and it's in co-orbit with their temu-James Webb telescope so it can actually get fixed if something goes wrong
>>16985322what military advantage does pre-positioning forces on the Moon have?
>>16985324Good luck stopping an orbital bombing campaign from the moon.
>>16985324Denying access to the Moon to anyone but the US and US allies
>>16985324i think it offers an advantage over GEO in that the moon is considered the "higher ground". so if fighting happens in GEO then having assets on the moon means you could have an advantage in the war.
>>16985224Well of course, Canadians can't work on Starship because of ITAR.
>>16985308>>16985309Melted kaowool nothingburger. Heat shield is fine. That one R-Vac needs to stop exploding every other flight though
>>16985342we need an ITAR safe version of starship
>>16985342which is kind of weird because canadians can work on ITAR material as long as they are doing it in canada
i've started getting patches and i have nowhere to put them. they're all sitting in a pile on the floor right now
>>16985364Get a denim jacket, one that’s just a little bit oversized (at least enough to comfortably wear a long sleeve and maybe a vest or lighter jacket underneath)Will serve you well during cool weather, also cold weather with layers. And will provide a canvas for patches
did they give up on the big door? Or is this just for starlink nowUsing this for anything other than putting large payloads into orbit for construction seems like a waste of time
>>16985367this is the HLS demonstrator. The astronauts just have to slide through.
>>16985367who is going to put their shit on starship? nobody has payloads that huge except spacex.
>>16985370NASA willthey must
>>16985370nobody has payloads this huge because it would be retarded to design a satellite that wouldn't fit or be too heavy for any existing launch platformonce one exists the big fucking spy sats are only going to fill the new vehicleobviously spacex is prioritizing starlink, but once that's proven a bigger door is obvious because the military/ commercial opportunity is huge
>>16985104to build space colonies, that would only be possible by gathering the materials from asteroids in space, then slam them back into earth to kill thousands of people because of spacenoids, aka spaceniggers, you gotta start from somewhere.
it's overhttps://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/21/spacex-insiders-will-get-to-sell-shares-earlier-than-usual-after-the-ipo.html
