Nick Stevens GraphicsSo, lets see if I got this right.
Saturn V, 13 launches, 100% success rate.
SpaceX Starship, 9 launches, 0% success rate.
Seems to me that Nazi rocket engineers are not what they used to be...
David Fleetwood - RG Admin@Nick_Stevens_graphics This is something that has been bothering me a lot. People keep treating SpaceX like a success, but within 20 years of the US space program we'd landed on the moon. SpaceX is 20 years in and can't even reliably build a rocket that gets into orbit.
Roger Moore@reflex @Nick_Stevens_graphics
That isn't really true. The Falcon 9 has been so successful at launching Starlink satellites that people are seriously worried about LEO getting too crowded. It's only the ultra heavy Starship that's having problems.
That isn't really true. The Falcon 9 has been so successful at launching Starlink satellites that people are seriously worried about LEO getting too crowded. It's only the ultra heavy Starship that's having problems.
@VATVSLPR @Nick_Stevens_graphics You mean the one that's comparable to what NASA historically was launching? That's the one that's having problems?
@reflex @Nick_Stevens_graphics
No. The one that's comparable to existing launch systems- except that it's reusable- has been working great. Maybe too well in the sense that they're sending up so many satellites that people are seriously talking about Kessler Syndrome. It's only their new system that's designed to be bigger than Saturn V that's having problems.
No. The one that's comparable to existing launch systems- except that it's reusable- has been working great. Maybe too well in the sense that they're sending up so many satellites that people are seriously talking about Kessler Syndrome. It's only their new system that's designed to be bigger than Saturn V that's having problems.
@VATVSLPR @Nick_Stevens_graphics I just looked it up and Saturn V had 12 successful launches, 1 partial but non critical failure, and started operation in 1967. So I guess it's safe to say that despite all the advantages of starting a program today, Musk has yet to catch up with what NASA was capable of in 1967.
Not much of a flex, honestly. Looks a lot like the Soviet N1 based on track record.
@Nick_Stevens_graphics @VATVSLPR Yeah, Saturn V was more expensive as a program but it demonstrates that you get what you pay for compared to the current launch everything and see what does not blow up model.
@reflex @Nick_Stevens_graphics
I agree that SpaceX needs to do more debugging on the ground rather than just hoping everything works right with the next launch. I think they were a lot more methodical with the Falcon series, which makes me think they're under pressure from above to perform now! Now! Now! That said, the success of the Falcon series should serve as an indication of how well SpaceX can perform when they're working at top efficiency.
I agree that SpaceX needs to do more debugging on the ground rather than just hoping everything works right with the next launch. I think they were a lot more methodical with the Falcon series, which makes me think they're under pressure from above to perform now! Now! Now! That said, the success of the Falcon series should serve as an indication of how well SpaceX can perform when they're working at top efficiency.
Dr. ir. Brian R. Pauw@VATVSLPR @reflex @Nick_Stevens_graphics that is possible only if they haven’t fired those that made the falcon design a success.
@doc @VATVSLPR @Nick_Stevens_graphics I don't agree with that assertion, engineers are generally specialists and Starship has challenges the existing Falcon engineering team seem ill equipped to handle. They either have to do it the hard way and reinvent the wheel or hire engineers who have worked on past larger rockets.