[HN Gopher] Live feed of Starship SN15 flight test
___________________________________________________________________
Live feed of Starship SN15 flight test
Author : prtkgpt
Score : 88 points
Date : 2021-05-05 22:24 UTC (35 minutes ago)
(HTM) web link (www.spacex.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.spacex.com)
| bpodgursky wrote:
| Lame. I came for explosions and shrapnel, and all I got was a
| viable POC of cheap interplanetary flight.
| CarVac wrote:
| Breaking news!
|
| Most boring Starship flight ever!
| loganwedwards wrote:
| This comment made my day. Looking forward to Starship flights
| to be as routine as the Falcons.
| fighterpilot wrote:
| Downvotes from all the negative people hoping this would fail
| whatshisface wrote:
| > _Shortly after the landing burn started, SN11 experienced a
| rapid unscheduled disassembly. Teams will continue to review data
| and work toward our next flight test._
|
| I wonder how many failures SpaceX can fund before the project
| ends up in trouble.
| foota wrote:
| It's my impression they're printing money, so probably a whole
| lot.
| bpodgursky wrote:
| I've heard that the Boca Chica operations are currently a
| really small % of the overall SpaceX budget given how cheap the
| materials and low the consequences are.
|
| (it's just steel + engines, and since there's no human or
| customer component, there's much less process than around the
| commercial launches)
| powderpig wrote:
| I'd imagine the most complex engine ever to use the full flow
| staged combustion cycle has a large price tag.
| nickik wrote:
| Its not that high, because its designed from the beginning
| to be produced in the 100s per year. Its probably being
| produced faster almost every other rocket engine (outside
| of SpaceX own) and maybe some much simpler engines from
| Russia or China.
|
| They are producing SN100ish by now. A while ago they said 2
| million $, already cheap for such an engine. Target is more
| like 200k$.
|
| So likely its between 1-2M. That would make it only about
| 6M per flight based on the engine.
| phpnode wrote:
| Presumably a vast majority of that cost is in R&D rather
| than manufacturing.
| google234123 wrote:
| Why are you bringing up #11?
| whatshisface wrote:
| That's what was on the page when I opened it. On my desktop
| it's talking about #15 though, so I guess I was victim of a
| weird mobile vs. desktop issue.
| jffry wrote:
| That's a standing, upright rocket, which is pretty cool!
|
| More camera angles (unofficial):
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPNvB5ComFw
|
| Looks like whatever the small fire was after the landing has been
| contained.
| guardiangod wrote:
| In the previous tests Spacex used 2-3 rocket engines for the
| initial landing burn.
|
| For SN15, the rocket used 2 engines throughout the landing
| procedure. I wonder if this is a sign of their confidence in the
| improved design.
|
| The landing was smooth as butter and nothing went noticeably
| wrong, although I did noticed that the rocket landed dangerous
| close to the edge of the concrete pad.
| pantalaimon wrote:
| There was also quite a bit of fire after the landing, but this
| time the rocket would not explode from it.
| Pfhreak wrote:
| Fire and a few pops/pings/small explosions in the engine
| area, but didn't appear to destabilize the rocket, which is a
| good sign.
| d_silin wrote:
| ...has landed!
| ArtWomb wrote:
| Congrats! Looks like they stuck the landing. Marks the 60th
| anniversary of first American in space: Alan Shepard's Mercury-
| Redstone 3 mission ;)
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury-Redstone_3
| fasteddie31003 wrote:
| Let's launch it again!
| d_silin wrote:
| Now the next step is high suborbital flight and then real orbital
| test.
| bpodgursky wrote:
| IIRC they don't plan on an orbital test of the standalone
| second-stage. They'll strap it to a superheavy first.
| d_silin wrote:
| Yes, you are right. But 100km altitude or so suborbital test
| is definitely possible with SN prototype alone.
| Aeolun wrote:
| It didn't explode!
| daedalus2027 wrote:
| At 11:08 you can see udp://234.70.253.161:9000
| skeletonjelly wrote:
| People have managed to tune into the raw video stream via RTL-
| SDR. I'm guessing this IP is post this step and internal to
| their streaming
|
| https://www.rtl-sdr.com/receiving-space-x-falcon-9-telemetry...
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26423406
| walrus01 wrote:
| IANA reserved multicast space, often used in peoples' internal
| networks, not something you could ever access unless you were
| connected to the same network segment as the video stream
| source.
| regnerba wrote:
| Today I learned, thanks for sharing that info!
| Laremere wrote:
| "Starship landing nominal!" - @elonmusk
|
| https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1390073153347592192
| raphaelj wrote:
| Any idea why they shutdown some engines during ascent?
|
| Seems efficient as you are fighting gravity with less
| acceleration and more dead weight.
| hiharryhere wrote:
| They're not trying to go fast. They're trying to get to the
| target altitude to test the flip. No need to rush or overshoot.
|
| In "production" it will be atop the booster, so taking off like
| this from sea level isn't part of the plan.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-05-05 23:00 UTC)