SpaceX Super Heavy and Starship updates

[Som]

On 11/03/2025 at 09:06, SALSN said:

I have to say since the new administration has taken over in the USA, my view of Musk has turned upside down, what happened to him?

For now I'm still rooting for SpaceX, their approach has worked so far, two failures in a row is disappointing, but not necessarily a problem. They have a (very) hardware rich development approach, and they have never claimed otherwise.

Regarding Musk, I hope they can somehow get rid of him, he has clearly lost his mind, I hope SpaceX has the momentum to carry on!

he's always been a prick, he now just as so much influence that he doesn't care if people know it

[+Warwagon MVC]

On 11/03/2025 at 06:02, snowy owl said:

Hey @SALSN, don't make the mistake of talking against Elon Musk! Because you're going to get scolded by the as####es in this thread, just like I did.

It's like when a republican comments in the Trump thread. 🤣

[adrynalyne]

On 11/03/2025 at 07:38, Warwagon said:

It's like when a republican comments in the Trump thread. 🤣

You mean MAGA.

[TrevorLahey]

On 07/03/2025 at 20:29, rdlenk said:

Also, the booster catch was awesome and the improvements we made to the tower after the failed catch on flight 6 (which I was directly involved with) worked well which is really exciting to see.

It was definitely interesting seeing the difference between this last catch and the prior catch.  Was it planned to be that different or was that just everything working together to compensate for winds or whatever caused it to not come in over the launch mount like it has in the past?

[TrevorLahey]

On 08/03/2025 at 00:15, FloatingFatMan said:

the really dumb way the SpaceX fans burst into applause even when here's a catastrophic failure.

The only people here celebrating is those that have a political vendetta against Musk and want to see any of his companies fail.  I've seen no nobody celebrate a failure, except a few that only show up after a failure these last 5 minutes that Musk has turned more right.  It seems like just yesterday Musk was supporting Andrew Yang and universal income or whatever that was called. 

I haven't celebrated failure, but I have made it a point to call out those that are celebrating (or only come to this thread to parade around) a failure.  I assume some confuse me calling that out as celebrating.  It's not.  I wanted to see the Starlink tests.  I really wanted to see the last failure fixed.  I really wanted to see the Raptor refired so we might see a Starship landing attempt this year.  I'm impatient and want to see a Starship on the moon or mars sooner than later.  The last thing I want to see is failure, but I also understand that it's not the end of the world to see a failure to really learn from something and learn quickly.

Edited March 12, 2025 by bguy_1986

[FloatingFatMan]

On 12/03/2025 at 12:19, bguy_1986 said:

The only people here celebrating is those that have a political vendetta against Musk and want to see any of his companies fail.  I've seen no nobody celebrate a failure, except a few that only show up after a failure these last 5 minutes that Musk has turned more right.  It seems like just yesterday Musk was supporting Andrew Yang and universal income or whatever that was called. 

I haven't celebrated failure, but I have made it a point to call out those that are celebrating (or only come to this thread to parade around) a failure.  I assume some confuse me calling that out as celebrating.  It's not.  I wanted to see the Starlink tests.  I really wanted to see the last failure fixed.  I really wanted to see the Raptor refired so we might see a Starship landing attempt this year.  I'm impatient and want to see a Starship on the moon or mars sooner than later.  The last thing I want to see is failure, but I also understand that it's not the end of the world to see a failure to really learn from something and learn quickly.

Well first, I don't have a political vendetta against Musk, I have an anti-conman vendetta against him; get your facts straight!

 

Second, I'm referring to all the morons in the audience IN THE LIVE STREAMS, that roar and cheer when it explodes.  Imbeciles, the lot of them.  If you've not seen that, try watching official launch streams because they're there, every time.

 

Third, Starship will NEVER get to Mars, and it's extremely unlikely to ever get to the Moon.  I doubt it'll even make it to a stable orbit; not with the same promised cargo/passenger loads Musk has made.  The stupid claims that crook makes are nothing but that because, at the end of the day, physics says no.

 

Humanity will eventually get to Mars, but not for the next couple of decades at a minimum, we can barely land robots on the place.  Hell, even the moon is a tricky target to land on, and you people want colonies on there?  

 

Get your head out of science fiction novels and look at the real world for a change.

[Xenon]

On 12/03/2025 at 08:19, bguy_1986 said:

The only people here celebrating is those that have a political vendetta against Musk and want to see any of his companies fail

I don't celebrate SpaceX failing. What pisses me off is that most people don't understand that every time a starship fails (not planned, like the last launch) it slows the program and costs the taxpayers more money. 

The entire Starship plan to the moon is a waste. The last time I checked it will require at least 10 starship launches to get Artemis III to the moon. The entire program is designed to soak the taxpayer. 

They can't come up with a way to not need at least TEN launches?

[SALSN]

On 12/03/2025 at 14:21, FloatingFatMan said:

I'm referring to all the morons in the audience IN THE LIVE STREAMS, that roar and cheer when it explodes. 

That is kind of weird. I understand that getting to that point in the mission is still an accomplishment, but celebrating when your product explodes is strange.

 

On 12/03/2025 at 14:21, FloatingFatMan said:

I doubt it'll even make it to a stable orbit

Why? All the upper stage needs to do, is relight the engines for a short period. They have relit the boosters several times, i don't think doing the same thing on the upper stage is fundamentally that different?
 

On 12/03/2025 at 14:21, FloatingFatMan said:

physics says no.

Does it though? It seems starship will be able to take a significant amount of payload to LEO, and that is really all we need to know, the rest is "just" technology and fuel launches.

[IsItPluggedIn]

On 13/03/2025 at 02:28, Xenon said:

I don't celebrate SpaceX failing. What pisses me off is that most people don't understand that every time a starship fails (not planned, like the last launch) it slows the program and costs the taxpayers more money. 

The entire Starship plan to the moon is a waste. The last time I checked it will require at least 10 starship launches to get Artemis III to the moon. The entire program is designed to soak the taxpayer. 

They can't come up with a way to not need at least TEN launches?

The Moon Landing is Fixed Price Contract for $3B. So if SpaceX blows up 4000k rockets it doesnt cost taxpayers anything more.

I know it will cost them due to the delay in the Artemis missions, the program has been delayed by every contractor available so far. With how long it takes them to prep another rocket and capsule, its still hard to guess which item is the long pole at the moment, there is still the suits as well. The whole program is a mess and needs to be redone. When one SLS launch is about $4B its not sustainable, which was the whole point of doing it the way it has been designed.

When handing out the contracts Starship was the only one that met the contract requirements. Blue was close but half arsed it because they thought they could get away with it, then got their $10B anyway. 

That being said SpaceX and Musk have never been good with timelines, I dont expect it to be ready next year, but I dont expect the Artemis 3 SLS to be ready then either. 

Blue should try to make them look bad by getting their lander there first. 

[FloatingFatMan]

On 25/03/2025 at 22:46, IsItPluggedIn said:

The Moon Landing is Fixed Price Contract for $3B. So if SpaceX blows up 4000k rockets it doesnt cost taxpayers anything more.

Two words.  Cost.  Overrun.  Learn them, understand them, and realise not a single space (or military) related project has EVER come in within budget...

 

On 25/03/2025 at 22:46, IsItPluggedIn said:

I know it will cost them due to the delay in the Artemis missions, the program has been delayed by every contractor available so far. With how long it takes them to prep another rocket and capsule, its still hard to guess which item is the long pole at the moment, there is still the suits as well. The whole program is a mess and needs to be redone. When one SLS launch is about $4B its not sustainable, which was the whole point of doing it the way it has been designed.

When handing out the contracts Starship was the only one that met the contract requirements. Blue was close but half arsed it because they thought they could get away with it, then got their $10B anyway. 

That being said SpaceX and Musk have never been good with timelines, I dont expect it to be ready next year, but I dont expect the Artemis 3 SLS to be ready then either. 

Blue should try to make them look bad by getting their lander there first. 

Elon Musk and believable  timelines have about as much in common with each other as strawberry ice cream and poop.

 

[TrevorLahey]

On 12/03/2025 at 09:21, FloatingFatMan said:

Second, I'm referring to all the morons in the audience IN THE LIVE STREAMS, that roar and cheer when it explodes.  Imbeciles, the lot of them.  If you've not seen that, try watching official launch streams because they're there, every time.

I watch the official launch streams.  I hear the crowd cheer and roar when the rocket is caught.  I don't really recall roars and cheers when it explodes.  I do hear a little bit of clapping, but I take that as employees supporting their coworkers, but this is after the "awes" of disappointment.

 

On 12/03/2025 at 09:21, FloatingFatMan said:

Third, Starship will NEVER get to Mars, and it's extremely unlikely to ever get to the Moon.  I doubt it'll even make it to a stable orbit; not with the same promised cargo/passenger loads Musk has made.  The stupid claims that crook makes are nothing but that because, at the end of the day, physics says no.

 

Humanity will eventually get to Mars, but not for the next couple of decades at a minimum, we can barely land robots on the place.  Hell, even the moon is a tricky target to land on, and you people want colonies on there?  

 

Get your head out of science fiction novels and look at the real world for a change.

I completely disagree.  It probably won't make Musk's timeline, but it will happen.  It's laughable that you think it won't even make a stable orbit.  People like you have said they'd never be able to land and reuse a rocket, it's now happening weekly.

We landed on the moon 50 years ago.  Tech has improved a lot since then and is improving exponentially now since Musk has come along.  Blue and others are only going to help move it along further and faster.

[SALSN]

@+FloatingFatMan I assume you concede my points, since you neglected to comment on them?

[IsItPluggedIn]

On 26/03/2025 at 19:25, FloatingFatMan said:

Two words.  Cost.  Overrun.  Learn them, understand them, and realise not a single space (or military) related project has EVER come in within budget...

In a Fixed price contract the contractor pays for any expense over the contract price. You are referring to a cost plus contract, where the government pays for any over runs.

In a fixed price contract the the government pays a set figure and the contractor delivers, pulls out or goes bankrupt.

In a cost plus contract, the government asks for a product and a contractor builds the product and the government pays all cost plus a percentage to the contractor. Thus when the contractor stuffs around they government has to pay more.

Im all for calling out crap, but you need to learn what the contracts are and understand them. I am pretty sure the CCtCap space program that created the crew dragon came in on budget due to it being a fixed price contract.

[DocM]

On 12/03/2025 at 11:28, Xenon said:

I don't celebrate SpaceX failing. What pisses me off is that most people don't understand that every time a starship fails (not planned, like the last launch) it slows the program and costs the taxpayers more money. 

What taxpayer money? 

First, the vast majority of the  Starship program is paid for by the profits from Starlink and Starshield, which are growing by leaps and bounds.

Second, any NASA money going into the starship program for Artemis is based on milestones met. The successful launch of the booster and catch may get a partial milestone payment, but whatever the Ship's mission was would not be paid for until it is achieved. It's up to NASA ia partial  payment would be made. Often they are not.

Third, it may or may not slow down the program. Finding problems on these early flights may actually speed it up rather than finding them later.

The commercial crew and cargo programs, commercial lunar payload services etc. are all milestone-based fixed price as described above by IsItPluggedIn

[DocM]

Well, I guess we know what NASA thinks about Starship 

https://spacenews.com/nasa-adds-starship-to-launch-contract/

NASA adds Starship to launch contract

WASHINGTON — NASA has added SpaceX’s Starship to a contract used for launching agency missions, but the vehicle still has significant work ahead before it can start launching major missions.

NASA announced March 28 that it had added Starship to its NASA Launch Services (NLS) II contract. The NLS II contract is used by the agency for acquiring launch services for many science and exploration missions.

SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets are already on NLS II and have been used frequently in recently years, such as the March 11 launch of the agency’s SPHEREx astrophysics spacecraft and PUNCH space science mission, which shared the same Falcon 9. Other vehicles on NLS II include Blue Origin’s New Glenn, Northrop Grumman’s Pegasus XL and United Launch Alliance’s Atlas 5 and Vulcan Centaur.

>

++++++

Pegasus XL is a small launch vehicle launched from the wing of an aircraft, and Atlas 5 is retiring - no longer in production. 

 

[Xenon]

On 31/03/2025 at 13:37, DocM said:

What taxpayer money? 

The tax money that is used on all the other projects and companies that are waiting to support the moneypit that is starship.

[Xenon]

On 31/03/2025 at 13:54, DocM said:

Well, I guess we know what NASA thinks about Starship 

Do you really think they had a choice? With the unelected nazi basically running the governments purse strings there was no way in hell that government money would go to another company. Like musk would allow another company to get the contract! 

[TrevorLahey]

On 31/03/2025 at 15:03, Xenon said:

Do you really think they had a choice? With the unelected nazi basically running the governments purse strings there was no way in hell that government money would go to another company. Like musk would allow another company to get the contract! 

There are plenty of other providers that have a NLS II contracts.  Blue Origin, ULA, Northrop Grumman, have one already.  Your hatred of Musk and the rest of the current administration is blinding you again.

[Xenon]

On 31/03/2025 at 15:18, bguy_1986 said:

There are plenty of other providers that have a NLS II contracts.  Blue Origin, ULA, Northrop Grumman, have one already.  Your hatred of Musk and the rest of the current administration is blinding you again.

I hate the nazi more than you can know and especially hate the fanboys that cheer him on. I admit that generally I don't support racists, thieves, liars, and people who abandon their child and then want to turn around and kill social security and health care for the poor. He is a parasite sucking the tax payers money. And all the other companies you mentioned great! Let see how many contracts they get against spacex in the future. I am sure they will be given a fair chance (lol).

[wakjak]

On 31/03/2025 at 17:34, Xenon said:

I hate the nazi more than you can know and especially hate the fanboys that cheer him on. I admit that generally I don't support racists, thieves, liars, and people who abandon their child and then want to turn around and kill social security and health care for the poor. He is a parasite sucking the tax payers money. And all the other companies you mentioned great! Let see how many contracts they get against spacex in the future. I am sure they will be given a fair chance (lol).

the more you bash daddy musk, the more it draws out the Cucks.

[DocM]

On 31/03/2025 at 15:03, Xenon said:

Do you really think they had a choice? With the unelected nazi basically running the governments purse strings there was no way in hell that government money would go to another company. Like musk would allow another company to get the contract! 

Those missions were contracted  during the Biden  Administration, so go talk to slow Joe.

On 31/03/2025 at 17:19, wakjak said:

the more you bash daddy musk, the more it draws out the Cucks.

Most anyone who follows aerospace knows more about it than you do.

[wakjak]

Another failure from spaceX go figure.

 

 

[Xenon]

The sun rises in the east and sets in the west. The sky is blue and starship block 2 goes boom. 

[FloatingFatMan]

I think it's time Musk sold SpaceX to Disney.  After all, THEY know how to make money from a spinning rocket...  

[+primortal Subscriber²]