NASA launched thirteen Saturn V’s without a single catastrophic failure.
 

Sorry Elon, leave it to the experts. 

2 hours ago, Doug47 said:

NASA launched thirteen Saturn V’s without a single catastrophic failure.
 

Sorry Elon, leave it to the experts. 

But this wasn't a catastrophic failure, they exceeded the primary objective on this test and hit the self destruct sequence, any unmanned test is not a failure its a gain.

I would also remind you that three astronauts did die on the launch pad in the Apollo Program during a test

3 hours ago, Doug47 said:

NASA launched thirteen Saturn V’s without a single catastrophic failure.
 

Sorry Elon, leave it to the experts. 

With all due respect, SpaceX are the experts these days. Their Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets are virtually flawless at the moment.

21 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

With all due respect, SpaceX are the experts these days. Their Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets are virtually flawless at the moment.

I think the rockets they have launched put an old car or something to orbit? That’s it? 
When they orbit the moon and take astronauts back to the moon, then we can talk. 
 

Until then, space-ex are a novelty act. 

7 hours ago, Doug47 said:

NASA launched thirteen Saturn V’s without a single catastrophic failure.
 

Sorry Elon, leave it to the experts. 

 

And SpaceX Falcon has completed 229 launches without a failure.

SpaceX ARE the current experts, and will be launching 80% of all payloads to space in 2023. Launching satalites, sending cargo to the ISS, military payloads etc.

When developing new technology, an extreme vehicle,  bigger than Saturn V, capable of being fully reused, capable of carrying 150 tons of payload into orbit, 33 engines, more than ever before installed on a rocket... you can expect failures.

In addition, the SpaceX philosophy is rapid prototyping and testing. Build fast, fail fast, learn fast. Failures are essential to gather data.

Nasa have had numerous failures of course, including loss of life. Including two disastrous Shuttle failures.

Edited April 22, 20233 yr by martin-w

2 hours ago, Doug47 said:

think the rockets they have launched put an old car or something to orbit? That’s it? 

 

Absolutely wrong. I welcome your contribution but you clearly aren't up to speed on anything that's happening in this field.

6 hours ago, Doug47 said:

I think the rockets they have launched put an old car or something to orbit?

That car was not so old. In fact, it was a fairly new Tesla: 

Where is Tesla Roadster in Space Now - Home (where-is-tesla-roadster.space)

It is also quite possible that the problems with the engines at launch are due to the lack of a flame trench beneath the launch pad. It is certainly a surprise that this complex does not have one. Launching a prototype Starship with three engines and 1.5 million pounds of thrust from a glorified bar stool is one thing, but doing it with thirty-three engines and 16.5 million pounds of thrust is an entirely different ball game. It seems that a rather large amount of debris was being blasted around at launch, and I would be surprised if this did not cause structural damage to the booster.

Edited April 22, 20233 yr by Christopher Low

22 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

It seems that a rather large amount of debris was being blasted around at launch

"One resident of Port Isabel, Texas, just 6 miles north of Starbase, called the noise and debris created by the launch "truly terrifying," the New York Times reported. Other Port Isabel residents reported broken windows, and some described it as "like a mini earthquake." NPR journalist Pablo De La Rosa also posted reports of particles from Starship's launch raining down on residents."

"According to a City of Port Isabel Facebook post, it has been confirmed that the spray of Starship detritus that covered locals' cars and homes posed no health risk, and was in fact sand and dust lofted airborne and thrown miles in every direction by the rocket's liftoff." 

"and VR video from twitter user @LabPadre, which was enlarged by DaneWang, show a NASA Spaceflight van getting mangled by the flying rubble."

https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-launch-debris-terrifying

1 hour ago, n4gix said:

That car was not so old. In fact, it was a fairly new Tesla:

 

It was Elon's  personal Tesla Roadster. It's 13 years old. 

 

38 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

It is also quite possible that the problems with the engines at launch are due to the lack of a flame trench beneath the launch pad. It is certainly a surprise that this complex does not have one. Launching a prototype Starship with three engines and 1.5 million pounds of thrust from a glorified bar stool is one thing, but doing it with thirty-three engines and 16.5 million pounds of thrust is an entirely different ball game. It seems that a rather large amount of debris was being blasted around at launch, and I would be surprised if this did not cause structural damage to the booster.

 

Yep, Elon said a while back that they were going to try without a flame trench, but he said they may regret it. There was a lot of concrete debris blasted skywards on launch, so I guess its feasible that Raptors were impacted and damaged. 

 

 

 

8 hours ago, Doug47 said:

I think the rockets they have launched put an old car or something to orbit? That’s it? 
When they orbit the moon and take astronauts back to the moon, then we can talk. 
 

Until then, space-ex are a novelty act. 

SpaceX has performed many dozens of successful satellite launches - both to low earth and geosynchronous orbit. Multiple manned and unmanned missions to and from the International Space Station with their Crew Dragon and Cargo Dragon spacecraft. 

They are hardly a “novelty act” - in fact they are NASA’s primary heavy lift contractor and have been for years. 

Edited April 22, 20233 yr by JRBarrett

44 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

SpaceX has performed many dozens of successful satellite launches

 

👍

I was wrong before, its not 223, it's 221 successful launches. 

So many people comment on what SpaceX is, isn't, has done, and hasn't done, without any knowledge of what they have really done whatsoever. 

 

Edited April 22, 20233 yr by martin-w

6 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

Absolutely wrong. I welcome your contribution but you clearly aren't up to speed on anything that's happening in this field.

ok, they send a few little rockets that go up, then back down? 
And big rockets that go up then explode? 
Am I getting closer? 🙂

I know I know. You like Elon Musk. 😛

 

 

More video of debris from the launch pad. Pay attention to the water. My guess is they will need both a flame trench and a sound suppression system for future launches.

https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1649602617381908480?s=20

 

8 minutes ago, goates said:

My guess is they will need both a flame trench and a sound suppression system for future launches.

When the Starship tilts slightly at the 10 second mark then returns to perpendicular, is that normal or is it the first sign of trouble?