[HN Gopher] Anonymous sources: Starship needs a major rebuild af...
___________________________________________________________________
Anonymous sources: Starship needs a major rebuild after 2
consecutive failures
Author : jethronethro
Score : 16 points
Date : 2025-03-19 19:22 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (behindtheblack.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (behindtheblack.com)
| exabrial wrote:
| This is hilarious. 15 years ago, every company blew up their
| rockets after one launch. Apparently reusability is so common
| now, we expect the opposite.
|
| But also, I don't think this is unexpected. It hasn't flown any
| real missions or delivered any commercial payloads. It look them
| quite awhile to reuse a Falcon9.
| kristianp wrote:
| This isn't a problem with reuse. Each starship tested is a new
| build at this stage.
| boppo1 wrote:
| So, by "rebuild", they mean redesign?
| wmf wrote:
| A failed launch isn't the same thing as a successful expendable
| launch.
| itishappy wrote:
| No surprises here. Consecutive apparently identical failures
| should obviously be throwing up red flags, but moving fast and
| breaking things was always about iterating. Admittedly, the line
| between moving fast and breaking things and throwing money into a
| flame trench is rather thin, but it's only a problem if they
| ignore their data. Data sure seems to indicate a new design is
| needed.
| throwaway4220 wrote:
| " The one saving grace is that FAA red tape is clearly no longer
| an additional obstacle. "
|
| This is wrong - remember starship tests in 2022 were not FAA
| limited. This is just hard problem
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-03-19 23:01 UTC)