Starship Flight 3 Test Launch

[Endymio]

Not misinformation. This was what Elon recently said. Oh wait, he's a liar, huh?

"No, we're going straight to Mars. The moon is a distraction."

Waste of taxpayer's money, me thinks. He already spent all his moon mission grant money and blew it up.

He's not a liar, you simply chose to misrepresent his remarks. He was criticizing the wasteful spending and lack of results of other NASA vendors. This link here has his full remarks, and their associated context:

Elon Musk: “We’re going straight to Mars. The Moon is a distraction.”

What to make of Musk’s comments that are critical of NASA’s lunar plans?

arstechnica.com

As for the so-called "grift", SpaceX's contract is results-based. They only get paid for reaching milestones.

 

[ty_ger]

When Elon successfully completes the contract he already received payment for, call me wrong.

R-T-B, it's hard to separate the con-man from the discussed con in action. Illumimating the purpose of the hype illuminates why they are failing to do what they are supposedly trying to do.

Their design is needlessly overly complicated, impractical, worse by all measures of safety and cost, and all they are doing is blowing up other people's money for fun. The idiocracy cheers on the destruction of their wealth. Here is a discussion, and at least I can reach a small fraction of that bamboozled crowd.

When Elon discusses government wasting other people's money, yes Elon, you are. Over $15billion. His personal "wealth" is untaxed debt, backed by hype, held up by the masses hoping that corruption and unfair treatment will keep his stocks soaring. It's absolutely astounding how unjust, corrupt, and broken this world is. Everyone is so selfish to find a way to the front of the pack on his coat heals, that they don't realize how destructive and enabling they are. They actively put money directly into his pockets for him to use in ways which often purposely hurt them.

 

[kapone32]

Anyone that wants to talk about Space Exploration should read Robert Heinlien. What he proposed about the Slingshot effect in his books was used by NASA for the Voyager projects. For Mars we sent rockets full of algae for 100 years to one particular place on Mars. That gave Mars the Atmosphere but not the entire planet. That was in a Science Fiction book though. Mars is a suicide Mission. The Hubris of mankind is foolish. We can't even live in the Ocean but we think we can go to some planet to live?

 

[ShiBDiB]

We can't even live in the Ocean but we think we can go to some planet to live?

What a weird statement... We can live in the ocean, NASA does expeditions all the time. There's just no benefit to us doing so at scale.

 

[ty_ger]

I wish we had a poll for how many people actually believe that we are going to Mars in the next 5 to 10 years.

There is no benefit for us dying on Mars.

 

[kapone32]

What a weird statement... We can live in the ocean, NASA does expeditions all the time. There's just no benefit to us doing so at scale.

Yes we can have bases underwater but can we extract the oxygen from the Water like fish? Do you think we would walk around in Space suits 24 hours a day? Do you have any idea how difficult infrastructure would be to accumulate, even in Orbit? When you drill down Mars would be no different than trying to live in the Ocean naturally. Don't get me started on pressure or Nitrogen poisoning. It is too late what we have started can't be stopped and Antarctica will remind us all how foolish debating Climate Change was as weather forecasters using catchy terms like Atmospheric River and Polar Vortex. That is the root if the Mars argument is it not?

 

[Endymio]

When Elon successfully completes the contract he already received payment for, call me wrong.

Is there no moderator here to delete persistent disinformation like this? Artemis I (the uncrewed lunar flyby) was already completed, and SpaceX paid for that portion. Artemis II is the crewed flyby (not a moon landing), and Artemis III -- for which SpaceX has not been paid -- is the crewed moon landing.

It's quite illuminating that, of all the glaring problems, missed milestones and cost overruns with the other contractors on the Artemis mission, you're focusing on the one company actually delivering on time and on budget. In short, you're a political zealot working off emotions, not facts.

Their design is needlessly overly complicated, impractical, worse by all measures of safety and cost

Total nonsense, which is why the Falcon 9 is dominating entirely the private NEO launch industry. SpaceX is making enormous profits by undercutting everyone else in the business ... because their reusable design works so well.

...yes Elon, you are. Over $15billion. His personal "wealth" is untaxed debt.

Again, you deserve a spanking and bed without supper for telling such whoppers. In one year alone, Musk paid more in federal income taxes than 49% of all Americans will their entire lives -- all of them combined. As for what you call "untaxed" wealth, it exists only on paper, and is a very raw estimate. If Musk attemped to dump his $400B in stock to actual cash, he'd net about 3 cents on the dollar.

 

[ty_ger]

1) SpaceX has done almost zero for Artemis missions and is WAY behind their initial timeline. All they have accomplished is blowing up money. Their greatest contribution is paying for someone else to accomplish what they failed to do?

Where are they on that timeline?

2) Already covered. This is page 3. SpaceX claimed a price, complained that Russia was gouging, and then increased their price massively to just slightly less than the complained-about Russian gouge price. Also, already discussed, SpaceX's price is only slightly less than the competition and that is easy to account for given the $15billion of taxpayer funding that went into their infrastructure. According to SpaceX's own success metrics defining when they will consider reusability as a success, they are massively failing. (also already discussed)
Payload is the biggest downfall of reusability, and payload reductions and maintenance costs offset any benefit. If they are doing so well and making so much profit, why was Elon warning his employees that they may go bankrupt in the middle of their Falcon 9 hayday?

3) Like many others in his class, Elon lives on loans and pays almost no taxes. Where are all the taxes he is paying? You made a claim.


They have been massively failing to go to the moon, don't even have a good idea how they would be able to reach the moon with so much weight, so little fuel efficiency, and engines which aren't performing as well as they hoped, and now they are pretending like they are going to Mars instead? It's a scam.

 

[the54thvoid]

Okay folks, this thread is about the Starship test launch(es) and what they do or do not mean for space.

Keep the personal politics of Musk out of it. Taxes, income, whatever - it doesn't bear any relevance to the technology concerned, certainly not in the science thread.

But, by all means, discuss and criticise the technology.

 

[Endymio]

1) SpaceX has done almost zero for Artemis missions and is WAY behind their initial timeline

SpaceX completed all Artemis I milestones, and the delays in Artemis II are due to other contractors: primarily Lockheed-Martin:

"...NASA's Office of Inspector General recently released a report identifying the heat shield as the [cause of the flight delay], currently scheduled for September 2025. Built by Lockheed Martin, the Orion capsule is protected by an ablative coating....."

2) (off topic deleted falsehood) and )3 (off topic falsehood deleted)

You are flat-out lying. Why?

 

[ty_ger]

...

I'm curious. Do you believe that we are going to Mars? I need a feel for where your head is at.

There is nothing on that timeline that SpaceX has completed. Yet you believe that they accomplished everything expected of them? You stated that they paid someone else to accomplish the task instead, and if you look at their 2020 timeline, they have done none of it. How is that success?

Now, they are apparently abandoning the rest of the failed moon mission goals and aiming straight for Mars? Do you believe they have what it takes?

 

[Endymio]

1) SpaceX has done almost zero for Artemis missions and is WAY behind their initial timeline. All they have accomplished is blowing up money. Their greatest contribution is paying for someone else to accomplish what they failed to do? ...Where are they on that timeline?

You're operating under so many misconceptions and falsehoods it's difficult to even know where to begin. But a few points. Artemis I is complete. Done. SpaceX fully completed all aspects of that contract. 100%.

What you're referring to his Artemis 3-7. And SpaceX is just one of many contractors involved. Most importantly, you seem to think NASA just wrote SpaceX a big check at the start. Wrong. SpaceX has been spending it's own money on Starship. NASA's NextSTEP-2 contract for HLS requires SpaceX to meet milestones in order to receive payment -- no milestone, no payment. I've said this before and you've repeatedly ignored it, so I'll repeat it: no milestones met, no payment.

Where is SpaceX on the HLS timeline? They've performed not just one but six (about to be seven) orbital launch tests, with the propellant transfer test due early next year. Why are they behind schedule? Primarily because after every launch, a half-dozen federal regulatory bodies step in and require extensive reviews and relicensing before they're able to conduct another test. The Feds shut them down for several months last year because some bird eggs "may have been" damaged by a launch, the EPA further delayed their permits to use wastewater to cool their launch pad, and the FAA has continually refused to allow them permits for additional launches.

As a prominent space issues reporter puts it: "....The flight cadence of Starship flights has been relatively low (by SpaceX standards) mainly due to bureaucratic delays in licensing, which SpaceX has complained about loudly and publicly ... To overcome inevitable issues, the company needs an increased flight cadence of Starship flights, and to get that, they need a sea-change in the regulatory landscape, with the FAA and other federal government agencies acting far faster than they have thus far...."

 

[the54thvoid]

^^ Let's not bring in one-sided 'anti-reg' arguments. Another member previously posted something about SpaceX violating Texan regs (as well as federal ones.) The deluge system you've mentioned doesn't just 'cool the launchpad,' it drenches it, then discharges the waste-water into Texan waterways (tidal flats). I was sympathetic to your points, but you're showing your bias here by providing a one-sided POV without acknowledging the actual breaches.

Talk about the tech only. Last warning.

 

[Endymio]

^^ Let's not bring in one-sided 'anti-reg' arguments. Another member previously posted something about SpaceX violating Texan regs (as well as federal ones.) The deluge system you've mentioned doesn't just 'cool the launchpad,' it drenches it, then discharges the waste-water into Texan waterways (tidal flats). I was sympathetic to your points, but you're showing your bias here by providing a one-sided POV without acknowledging the actual breaches.

Talk about the tech only. Last warning.

You can't talk about the tech without talking about why the tech isn't working. Your post displays your own bias -- First of all, SpaceX *already* has a wastewater permit for the site. Furthermore, even before the drenching system was added, that very same concrete pad was rinsed dozens of times per year by normal rainwater -- which then flowed directly into those same Texas waterways. Any contaminants left on the pad were thus already being "discharged" into those tidal flats. The notion that further drenching the pad somehow adds pollutants to the water system is frankly absurd.

If you find that discussing why SpaceX can't launch more Starships because of regulatory issues to be somehow "off topic" to a thread on Starship launches, then please simply delete my forum account.

 

[ty_ger]

Artemis 1 was an uncrewed mission to the moon. SpaceX performed which part of that? According to you, SpaceX subcontracted their duties out. So what evidence of SpaceX HLS success do we have? I don't see SpaceX's name anywhere in the credits for Artemis 1. You keep saying it's done, and I keep asking what did they do? If you think SpaceX accomplished something which justifies 'services already rendered', according to you, please define what they did. And please tell me what they did which gives you confidence in their future HLS success. They have not yet completed one single item in their gantt schedule. No orbit, no boxes checked. You say it is regulation that is slowing them down, but I think their track-record and fail hard mentality warrants their regulation. They have a big, heavy, empty stainless-steel, floppy, glowing red-hot tube, and a bunch of engines. The engines aren't performing as well as they hoped, at 15 to 25% less thrust than originally planned for. The overweight stainless husk isn't performing as well as they hoped. They blew up their launch pad during their first attempt. Even when empty and floppy, it weighs too much. They just keep blowing them up. What confidence should regulators have? SpaceX sells hopes, dreams, absurd renderings, and no concrete answers for why we should trust them. Many companies orbit, even SpaceX. Each design requires testing and evidence. Their failure to even achieve orbit is their own fault, not regulator's fault. They don't know how they can get it to the moon without refueling it a dozen times in orbit. It's not practical or economical. And now they are apparently abandoning the remainder of their moon mission involvement and aiming straight to Mars. It is absolutely absurd. It's a scam.

Do you believe they are going to Mars in 5 to 10 years? Simple question.

If you fail, it's your fault. If you are that big and allow yourself to fail, who else can you blame but yourself?

 

[ty_ger]

Who could have predicted another failure? That pesky regulation! They should be orbiting right now if it weren't for everybody holding them back! It's not their fault that they are 4 years behind schedule and have contributed nothing to the contract!

Edit: less trigger words

 

[Endymio]

Artemis 1 was an uncrewed mission to the moon. SpaceX performed which part of that? If you think SpaceX accomplished something which justifies 'services already rendered', according to you, please define what they did.

Artemis I was contracted by Boeing & Lockheed-Martin on a cost-plus contract basis, meaning the more they spent, the more they got paid. SpaceX's contract for HLS is fixed price. And what you can't seem to understand -- or are intentionally misunderstanding -- is that NASA didn't simply write a check for the contract amount. SpaceX gets paid ONLY when they deliver the terms of the contract. So please, stop with the absurd misinformation that Musk is somehow "scaming" money and not delivering what was promised. So far SpaceX has spent more than $6B of its own money on Starship, and been paid only a few hundred million for the initial feasibility study. Even when SpaceX completes the contract, they'll still show a large loss on Starship R&D costs --- which was to be expected. SpaceX bid HLS extremely low because they expect to resell Starship launches on the private market.

And yes, they had a failed launch today. Had you been following the past six launches, you'd know the program has made dramatic improvements with each successive iteration. Once the Trump Administration takes charge this month and gets the EPA and FAA to stop stonewalling Starship launches, we'll see even more rapid progress.

 

[inquisitor1]

the Starship rocket

who owns this company?

 

[ty_ger]

You are the one who said SpaceX got money for its Artemis contributions. Why are you trying to distance yourself from it now? Whoops!
SpaceX has received over $15billion in taxpayer money that we know about. Over $3billion that we know about directly for HLS. Not few hundred million. For what? Even you aren't so sure any more.

Do you think they are going to Mars any year now? Think we are going to build a Mars base? Seriously, answer the question. Let us know how dilusional you are. Or are you just sticking up for your boy because you think somehow he will make you some money?

Do you have any clue what you are talking about? What's your motive? Where's your money invested?

And yes, they had a failed launch today. Had you been following the past six launches, you'd know the program has made dramatic improvements with each successive iteration. Once the Trump Administration takes charge this month and gets the EPA and FAA to stop stonewalling Starship launches, we'll see even more rapid progress.

Yeah, only zero events complete in their timeline 4 years late. Keep trying! We'll give them more money. Abandoned the moon? Oh, that's okay. You are making such great progress that I understand why you have to put all your energy into Mars. Can't even get the propulsion and fuel to get to the moon? Eh, I'm sure Mars is easier.

Pesky FAA really messed up #7. Less regulation is what they needed. Let's burn more money on stupidity! Ra ra ra!

Here comes the corruption. Get your money while you can. Who do you think makes them money? You! They are draining all of us fools dry. Liar and liar incorporated wrangling the money with open corruption.


What we will see is more rapid destruction once the looting of our society is complete and there is nothing left to squeeze. SpaceX has already proved that they are incapable and have insane goals that make zero sense. There is no corruption that is going to fix their problems. You can't avoid laws of nature.

 

[johnspack]

Nice job Musk.... BoooooooM!

 

[the54thvoid]

As the OP stated:

Here's the best footage I've found.

Pretty cool to watch.

This thread is for discussing the Starship rocket, this test, and the current space tech scene, not Elon haters/fanboys or anything else.

A couple of reply bans have been given.