Science SPACEX "Starship" explodes shortly after launch

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

SPACEX​

"Starship" explodes shortly after launch​

The unmanned "Starship" giant rocket of the US space company SpaceX has exploded during its first test flight. The largest and most powerful rocket ever built took off on Thursday from the SpaceX spaceport Starbase in Boca Chica in the US state of Texas. However, just over three minutes after launch, the rocket detonated, live footage showed.​
Online since today, 3:41 p.m. (Update: 3:57 p.m.)

At that point, the first booster stage called "Super Heavy" should have separated from the "Starship" space shuttle. SpaceX spoke on Twitter of a "rapid unplanned breakup prior to stage separation." "Teams will continue to evaluate data and work toward our next flight test," tech billionaire Elon Musk's company added. The launch was delayed by a few minutes: the countdown had been briefly interrupted to check some more details. Afterwards, the launch was released after all. Actually, the "Starship" of the private space company SpaceX of tech billionaire Elon Musk should have already taken off on Monday for a first short test flight. But that was postponed shortly before the planned launch because of a problem with a valve.

Enormous setback
The "Starship" rocket system - consisting of the roughly 70-meter-long "Super Heavy" booster and the roughly 50-meter-long upper stage, also called "Starship" - is intended to enable manned missions to the moon and Mars in the future. The "Starship" system is in itself designed so that the spacecraft and rocket can be reused after returning to Earth. The explosion, however, is an enormous setback for the initiative. The U.S. space agency NASA has selected "Starship" to fly humans to the moon for the first time in more than 50 years in the Artemis 3 mission at the end of 2025. Even flights to Mars should be possible with the rocket.

First attempt briefly halted
The launch of the 120-meter-high rocket from SpaceX's Starbase spaceport in Boca Chica was stopped on Monday less than ten minutes before the planned ignition. As a kind of dress rehearsal, however, the countdown continued until ten seconds before the originally planned launch time. The reason given for the abort was a technical problem with the pressure equalization on the most powerful space rocket ever built. Musk wrote on Twitter, apparently a valve had frozen. However, he said SpaceX had "learned a lot" from the launch attempt. It was only in February that almost all of the rocket's first stage engines had successfully ignited for the first time during a test in Boca Chica. Musk then declared that the 31 engines ignited in the test were "enough to reach orbit".

Explosion after first landing
Apart from the size and the associated possibility of transporting large loads, the reusability of all rocket components pursued by SpaceX is another central element of the "Starship" program. The declared goal is to significantly reduce the cost of operating spacecraft. SpaceX reported the first successful landing of a prototype in May 2021. Shortly thereafter, the explosion of the rocket made headlines. It was the third explosion within a few months - yet Musk remained convinced that the "Starship" rocket would soon be "safe enough" to transport people.

Youtube Video

Private moon orbit with billionaire and artists
Since last year, SpaceX has been trying to launch its spacecraft into orbit for the first time. At the beginning of the year, Musk had initially set a launch date of February or March - but at the same time made this dependent on the further course of testing. The schedule will be missed by at least a few weeks. A first private space mission is also planned for this year. The Japanese billionaire Yusaku Maezawa recently announced his intention to circumnavigate the moon in a "starship" together with eight artists. The moon will then also be the destination of a mission pursued jointly with NASA.

Central role for NASA moon program

NASA is currently planning to use "Starship" as a landing module in its Artemis program in 2025 at the earliest. The rocket is significantly larger and more powerful than NASA's SLS rocket, which the space agency plans to use to put astronauts into orbit around the moon from 2024.​
1681999822370.png
After several weeks in space, the unmanned "Orion" capsule of NASA's Artemis 1 lunar mission returned to Earth in December

According to NASA plans, the "Starship" mission is dependent on the progress of the Artemis-2 mission. After the Artemis-1 mission, which ended in December with the return of an unmanned Orion space capsule to Earth, a manned orbit of the moon is now on the agenda. The next step will be to bring astronauts to the moon again with the "Starship". NASA put the last humans on the moon in 1972 with the Apollo 17 mission. The USA was the only country to put twelve astronauts on the moon with the Apollo missions between 1969 and 1972.

Space suits ready
Artemis 3 will be much more complex, according to NASA, combining the SLS "Orion" system with spacecraft built and flown by SpaceX. The NASA plan calls for a four-person "Orion" crew to dock in space with a SpaceX lander that will carry two astronauts to the lunar surface for nearly a week.

Twitter | Archive

According to NASA, an orbital fuel depot and a space tanker are required in addition to the Starship. The new space suits developed for the mission in collaboration with Axiom Space were unveiled by NASA in mid-March. In the "Starship" program, the moon is only the first stopover on the first manned mission to Mars, which Musk has already announced for 2029.
red, ORF.at/Agencies

Source (German)
 
reason the journoscum think it blowing up is a failure is because they’ve never done anything that ground breaking or difficult. ...They have absolutely o idea how really ground breaking technical projects work.


They've really never done anything "outside world" that isn't classrooms and typewriters up to their modern equivs, they have no experience at anything. If there's a report on guns, or a drive-by-jogging count on hearing the word clip. or shells called bullets or something. If it's a report on bicycles you can count on them using a wrong name for a basic component like handlebars seat wheel tire or not knowing how one of these works. They will not be able to tell you anything about where a lawnmower is used and where a a weedeater would be. If it's boyscouts camping they'll wonder what type of permits and fire dept pre-notification are needed for lighting ACKSHUAL TREES ON FAR!
 
Last edited:
The expectation is that it would make it into space and NOT blow up and the all-essential and critical detachment from the primary stage would happen.

Call it progress but it blowing up is a fucking gigantic “oops” and doesn’t compare to “cybertruck windows smashing.”.

It needed to NOT blow up and almost any other error would be OK except the most important - DONT BLOW UP.

The size of the rocket is really incidental; 60 years ago a German built a rocket to go to the moon and it never blew up. Perhaps he should spent less time on Twitter and more time at his company that is supposed to be selling rockets to the government to carry lunar payloads, people and eventually nuclear reactors into space.

Not a good start at all. “Oopsie daisy” and “progress made” is not what is going through NASAs Directors head right now regardless of what he says in public.
 
The size of the rocket is really incidental; 60 years ago a German built a rocket to go to the moon and it never blew up. Perhaps he should spent less time on Twitter and more time at his company that is supposed to be selling rockets to the government to carry lunar payloads, people and eventually nuclear reactors into space.
The Saturn V didn't appear out of nowhere, it was the result of many lessons learned from prior models including multiple failures. Even the Saturn V had a failure with Apollo 6.

The SpaceX Starship is nearly double the mass of the Saturn V and can carry a payload that is substantially larger, with proprietary engines and other newly-developed features. It's also a reusable rocket which adds its own design complexities. It will take years of further testing and development before there's a model fully suitable for use by NASA and private companies.
 
Perhaps he should spent less time on Twitter and more time at his company that is supposed to be selling rockets to the government to carry lunar payloads, people and eventually nuclear reactors into space.

Serious question: Is elon/tesla/spacex still on dem gibs in some big or at least notable way? Is he goldbricking (berging) and shitposting? I mean I do appreciate that whatever it is he's doing seems to be leading to killing twitter, and I'm gonna buy me a fast as fuck tesla if (when) he spergs and does an ultimate shitpost that pisses people off bad enough for them to dump them for cheap.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: The Hardest R
Serious question: Is elon/tesla/spacex still on dem gibs in some big or at least notable way? Is he goldbricking and shitposting? I mean I do appreciate that whatever it is he's doing seems to be leading to killing twitter, and I'm gonna buy me a fast as fuck tesla if he does an ultimate shitpost that pisses people off bad enough for them to dump them for cheap.
I still have a deposit for a cyber truck I’ll never get so I like Elon while at the same time hate his guts. I can’t tell what affiliation he has other than to his own ideas. Im not sure anyone else really knows either.

I’d like to see Twitter die and have wanted that long before Elon took over it but a little more since he took it over. If you haven’t left Twitter I can only tell you it feels as good if not better than quitting FB.

I hope he does something stupid that sees Tesla hated as a result; I’d be in the market for a sweet buy also.
 
Is elon/tesla/spacex still on dem gibs in some big or at least notable way?
The majority of spacex's funds comes in the form of private investors.
The majority of its revenue comes from government contracts, which isn't gibs per se it's just launching spy sats and astronauts and getting paid. The rest comes from starlink and launch contracts with other companies.

Ironcally enough when spacex started winning government contracts they and the us gov were getting sued by other launch providers because they were charging the government too little money.
 
I still have a deposit for a cyber truck I’ll never get so I like Elon while at the same time hate his guts. I can’t tell what affiliation he has other than to his own ideas. Im not sure anyone else really knows either.

I’d like to see Twitter die and have wanted that long before Elon took over it but a little more since he took it over. If you haven’t left Twitter I can only tell you it feels as good if not better than quitting FB.

I hope he does something stupid that sees Tesla hated as a result; I’d be in the market for a sweet buy also.
You can get a refund on that deposit and cybertruck comes out this summer/fall.
 
Was pretty exciting to see. Very weird seeing it kind of just spinning in place. Sure wouldn't want to get on one, probably ever, since there's really no abort method possible with it.

Saw this thing bitching, really hates Elon..

View attachment 5072919
> A tranny calling someone else a fraud.
>Someone who actually managed to make advances in their field and not make a shitty indie game known for its atrocious art and gameplay
>Someone that has 10 kids and doesn't pretend to be the opposite gender
>Fraud

:story:
 
I watched it live on the spacex yt channel, they had a lisping homo as their main commentator, like why for real? This is high profile stuff. Or did I seriously just answer my question there?
"Like... omg, the thingyyyy, just like... did boom, lol.."

I can imagine that.
 
The size of the rocket is really incidental; 60 years ago a German built a rocket to go to the moon and it never blew up.
Saturn was massively over-engineered relative to its capabilities. Partly because of the lesser understanding of materials science the era, partly due to the design philosophy prevalent in the organisation's involved in its construction. The Saturn was built to withstand far greater stresses than it was anticipated to undergo and was, as I said, over-engineered for its purpose. It worked, but it was extremely inefficient and expensive. This is the polar opposite of spacex, which pares back to the barest minimum viable structure and then iterates designs until they stop exploding.
 
I'm all for shitting on Elon he's a figurehead who thinks he's a spanner but the only thing I do give him cudos for is space-x not for his involvement but for keeping the money coming in to make them do cool shit -

This laucnh while a failure was one of the absurdly low Space-X failures, and this wasn't a unexpected failure i.e. they knew that this failure was possible but couldn't explain or pay for the engineer to work his way out of the problem - this is the early age of space flight before now it was a few tentative missions but this is the start of a new gold rush - the thing is there is a massive bunch of problems you can't just spend your way out of and it takes a level of learning and iteration he doesn't like.
 
Last edited:
The whole Artemis program is a laugh riot. Spend billions and billions of dollars and nearly 20 years of development making a rocket that will be dependent on multiple Space-X launches. I guess Elon has a really good coke connection.
View attachment 5072945

Coming from someone who used to be the BIGGEST astro-nerd in the entire family, Artemis being our best idea is a great big double-facepalm. We could've refit proven spaceworthy designs with no more than a trio (redundancy) of Pi 4b's for computing power to replace the stone-age electromechanical shit they originally flew with and be halfway done with that moon base already. Versus the cost and time to even get to the starting line for Artemis.
:story: KABOOM!

Remember in the 60s when you totally went to the moon to own the Russians? Remember how easy it was? Like 2 tin cans connected by a string. What happened?
Operation Paperclip, for one thing. We swooped up some of the smartest Aryans on the entire goddamn planet, including the folks who designed and built the V-1/V-2's.

Also, consider American schools in the 1960s:
  1. GTFO with your dyke and lesbian perversions, Gore-Bull warming lies and your Marxism. I'm also reporting you to the HUAC for that last one.
  2. Students can be spanked, failed, and expelled when they deserve it.
  3. Fuck "inclusion", your hand-flapping freakbrat is going to Special Ed.
  4. Classroom distractions get stomped on and thrown in the trash by teacher, no refunds issued.
The 1960's space program wouldn't have gotten too damn far if most of the kids entering college were functionally illiterate,. functionally innumerate, had uncorrected rebellion issues, shit work ethics and been LGTBQPedo brainwashed to hell.
 
Last edited:
Retards that don't know shit about rocketry and how absurdly complicated it is to ride a explosion out of a planet trying to talk shit about a african american because his huge ass tube of flammable death exploded after 4 minutes and 30 kilometers of flight on the first try of making it fly.

Compare this to the only other NASA competitor to ever have a chance at making a Super-Heavy Rocket, the USSR and the N1. whose biggest success was less than 2 minutes of flight, and that was on the 4th attempt. Attempts 1 and 2 only managed to leave the rocket pad and pass the tower, while 3 only got 45 seconds.

This is a huge step forward for mankind. I for one hope to see it succeed even if Elon can be cringe at time.

Would love to compare the cost too, I assume SpaceX is cheaper than Shuttle at the very least, and by a significant margin. Shuttle program was notoriously expensive if my memory serves me right.
Quick research shows the Shuttle cost about 210 Billion. For comparison the Saturn V cost around 46 Billion.

I think the worst parts about the Space Shuttle project are:

1. I was a resource hog for a lot of other projects like more space stations and probes

2, It was kind of useless, because the whole thing was designed under the idea of having it as a backbone of the S.D.I. to deploy and maintain it which never happned

3. The USSR attempt at it, the Buran, was actually the one time the fucking Ruskies did something better. And the Buran ended up being abandoned and ignored.
 
Last edited:
Would love to compare the cost too, I assume SpaceX is cheaper than Shuttle at the very least, and by a significant margin. Shuttle program was notoriously expensive if my memory serves me right.
Found a NASA report on price from 2018:
NASA Report Archive

If the numbers are right, the market price is 1/20th the cost per kilo for low earth orbit and 1/4 the cost per kilo for delivering people and supplies to the ISS.
Market prices, so maybe Ariane 5 and Proton-M were cheaper than the shuttle as well. However, since 2018 SpaceX has launched the Falcon 9 >150 times, which is actually more than Ariane 5 has in it's 25 year history. Falcon 9 didn't start scaling to double digits until 2016.

Given all that, I think the Shuttle still deserves credit, it never scaled to mass production and it's public funded nature meant it was built to do a specific task, like deploy ISS or Hubble. Also meant retarded design descisions were made for Congressional Pork. Like having the boosters made in parts in Texas rather than shipped as a single constructed unit from France. It still accomplished what it did with vastly more primitive technologies and design capabilities than SpaceX. It also had a giant red tube, I like the giant red tube.

The 1960's space program wouldn't have gotten too damn far if most of the kids entering college were functionally illiterate,. functionally innumerate, had uncorrected rebellion issues, shit work ethics and been LGTBQPedo brainwashed to hell.
To be fair, in the 60s it was Greatest Generation engineers doing most of the work, and I think beatings were mandatory back in the 20s.
 
Retards that don't know shit about rocketry and how absurdly complicated it is to ride a explosion out of a planet trying to talk shit about a african american because his huge ass tube of flammable death exploded after 4 minutes and 30 kilometers of flight on the first try of making it fly.
I swear people think designing a completely new rocket to deliver a massive payload into orbit is as easy as playing KSP.
 
The USSR attempt at it, the Buran, was actually the one time the fucking Ruskies did something better.
Their closed-cycle rocket designs, while they couldn't make them work reliably primarily due to lack of funding, were also super efficient. So efficient that (reportedly) American engineers even in the '90s were really skeptical of the specs until they tested the Russian engines themselves.
 
Back