PJYoung said:

---

This guy thinks the next investigation will be at least as long as the first one because of the nature of the explosions. Everybody can have an opinion I guess. He thinks the booster exploded possibly because of a design flaw.

---

How's his track record with predictions?

bmks270 said:

---

It created delays making it slower, and the repairs cost more money in the long run. It creates extra work and burnout for employees. It also is terrible PR and damages relationships with locals, and with regulators. You can rationalize it, but it was objectively a bad decision.

"Slow is fast and fast is slow"

---

I agree, but, I think after seeing what Starship did with IFT-1, they might have engineered the pad for IFT-2 beyond what they would have done without the experience of IFT-1.

pic.twitter.com/8iuiFUQXIQ

— Pulte (@pulte) November 20, 2023

PJYoung said:

---

---

That's got to be a composite right?

I took a drone shot of IFT-1 and IFT-2 in the same spot at the same altitude. Here's the side-by-side...

TexAgs91 said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

That's got to be a composite right?

---

Don't think so. Spacex posted it tonight.

PJYoung said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

That's got to be a composite right?

---

Don't think so. Spacex posted it tonight.

---

Wow, amazing shot

Yeah, I don't think SpaceX results prove out your statment

TexAgs91 said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

That's got to be a composite right?

---

That is 1st rate rocket porn!

Saw blue, pink, white criss cross.

It was extremely clear with the naked eye, and haven't seen the same on photos. Diamond pattern of flames. Some of the latest photos are getting close.

You can't get the same look and feeling through camera and audio as you can in person.

Premium said:

---

Saw blue, pink, white criss cross.

It was extremely clear with the naked eye, and haven't seen the same on photos. Diamond pattern of flames. Some of the latest photos are getting close.

You can't get the same look and feeling through camera and audio as you can in person.

---

I know what you mean. Those diamonds were bright and very distinct. Computer images and photos can't capture all the light levels our eyes can.

Premium said:

---

Saw blue, pink, white criss cross.

It was extremely clear with the naked eye, and haven't seen the same on photos. Diamond pattern of flames. Some of the latest photos are getting close.

You can't get the same look and feeling through camera and audio as you can in person.

---

Shock diamonds...

Really cool phenomenon.

PJYoung said:

---

---

Maybe could fry some eggs ?

Starship Flight 3 hardware should be ready to fly in 3 to 4 weeks. There are three ships in final production in the high bay (as can be seen from the highway).

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 20, 2023

PJYoung said:

---

Starship Flight 3 hardware should be ready to fly in 3 to 4 weeks. There are three ships in final production in the high bay (as can be seen from the highway).

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 20, 2023

---

Dammit. I need 4.5 weeks.

I'm going to a mini vacation to the bottom end of my island and stay at Margaritaville over Christmas.

Was hoping to catch a launch...

Ag with kids said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Starship Flight 3 hardware should be ready to fly in 3 to 4 weeks. There are three ships in final production in the high bay (as can be seen from the highway).

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 20, 2023

---

Dammit. I need 4.5 weeks.

I'm going to a mini vacation to the bottom end of my island and stay at Margaritaville over Christmas.

Was hoping to catch a launch...

---

I would be shocked if they launch before February.

The DAF Rapid Capabilities Office, in partnership with the United States Space Force, is scheduled to launch the 7th mission of the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle on Dec. 7 from Kennedy Space Center. It will conduct tests / evals. 👇 #X37B #USSF52 https://t.co/OKOHUhGfG2

— United States Space Force (@SpaceForceDoD) November 8, 2023

Launch will be on a previously announced Falcon Heavy for DOD, but the payload wasn't made public until earlier this month.

The beat goes on.

That's Booster 11 heading back to the Production Site from its cryo testing at Masseys. Remember, Booster 10 has already undergone that milestone, and "just" needs to be Static Fired when the OLM is ready to host it.https://t.co/e3xbqPnwZ5 pic.twitter.com/sIIUJSOd3L

— Chris Bergin - NSF (@NASASpaceflight) November 20, 2023

Except for the Saturn V

REENTRADA DE LA STARSHIP ☄️🔥

Desde Puerto Rico, múltiples personas han podido captar partes de la nave #Starship de #SpaceX reingresando a la atmósfera. Coincide con los datos de radar que muestran escombros al norte de la zona 🚀pic.twitter.com/yiEOVpEyOy

— Frontera Espacial (@FronteraSpacial) November 18, 2023

Today at 9:09am, SpaceX Starship. North Coast of Puerto Rico.
📸: JCJ Photos@elonmusk @SpaceX @adamonzon pic.twitter.com/HsRuljJK8b

— Jankiel Carranza (@jankielc_) November 18, 2023

Uh pretty sure the super heavy booster is roughly double the thrust of a Saturn V. A little over like 7 million lbs of thrust vs 17 ish. Could be wrong but pretty the most powerful previous one was the Soviet's N-1 at like 10 million.

Well sure but it was developed in around 5 years to flight. Still incredible today, largely with slide rules/hand calculations and having to make up a lot of stuff as they went along.

For something that only flew like 13 times or so, it's a hallowed part of humanity's scientific accomplishments, and notably of course also never 'failed' completely in flight, something we are still hoping to see happen with Starship is…reaching orbit/delivering a payload.

Someone on twitter had an interesting comment though; imagine for all the other commercial launch providers with products/planned products, if Starship works even just as much as F9 does in another 5 years (100 launches a year or so), how will they be remotely competitive?

nortex97 said:

---

Well sure but it was developed in around 5 years to flight. Still incredible today, largely with slide rules/hand calculations and having to make up a lot of stuff as they went along.

For something that only flew like 13 times or so, it's a hallowed part of humanity's scientific accomplishments, and notably of course also never 'failed' completely in flight, something we are still hoping to see happen with Starship is…reaching orbit/delivering a payload.

Someone on twitter had an interesting comment though; imagine for all the other commercial launch providers with products/planned products, if Starship works even just as much as F9 does in another 5 years (100 launches a year or so), how will they be remotely competitive?

---

They'll have to be competitive on turn around time, assuming there is more launch demand than there is supply.

Agree on all that.

The scale of investment should also be recognized in any comparison, as well the comparative timeline for major aerospace projects such as the 787 etc (which have all grown exponentially longer in the intervening decades being my point).

It's not a 'put down' on Apollo engineers/managers/workers at all to note that starship is already an accomplishment worthy of comparison, not simply on mass to orbit/total pounds of thrust or cost, time to develop etc., but overall. The right leadership team, timing, focus, and investments were critical in both.

We've squabbled about the impact on seagulls/plovers etc. here over just the past week or three, and with our metastasizing government/bureaucracy, it's incredible the success the starship team has reached so far.

aezmvp said:

---

Uh pretty sure the super heavy booster is roughly double the thrust of a Saturn V. A little over like 7 million lbs of thrust vs 17 ish. Could be wrong but pretty the most powerful previous one was the Soviet's N-1 at like 10 million.

---

You didn't read the x post?

TexAgs91 said:

---

aezmvp said:

---

Uh pretty sure the super heavy booster is roughly double the thrust of a Saturn V. A little over like 7 million lbs of thrust vs 17 ish. Could be wrong but pretty the most powerful previous one was the Soviet's N-1 at like 10 million.

---

You didn't read the x post?

---

I didn't... can you clarify?

aTmAg said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aezmvp said:

---

Uh pretty sure the super heavy booster is roughly double the thrust of a Saturn V. A little over like 7 million lbs of thrust vs 17 ish. Could be wrong but pretty the most powerful previous one was the Soviet's N-1 at like 10 million.

---

You didn't read the x post?

---

I didn't... can you clarify?

---

Click these links

a few times until you follow the conversation back to nortex97's post, and then you read the X post to find out that this isn't about how powerful the Starship is, but about how quickly it has been developed, to which I replied that the Saturn V was also developed quickly.

Saturn V officially started development in 61, and the first launch was 67. And that is without all the ridiculous regulations Space X has had to deal with. (And at only $5B-$10B cost.. which is ridiculously cheap compared to $266B in modern dollars for Saturn V)