1 minute ago, dmwalker said:

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?

I believe that was deliberate and had to do with clearing the tower and to help prevent the rocket from falling back on the tower if it failed. The video I shared on the previous page goes through some if it.

1 hour ago, martin-w said:

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. 

SpaceX has launched 26 times this year alone.

 

53 minutes ago, goates said:

The video I shared on the previous page goes through some if it.

Very informative and raises the question of why they chose that location in the first place. I suppose there just aren't that many choices.

2 hours ago, goates said:

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

 

Yeah, looks like it. That will generate quite a delay I would think. 

 

1 hour ago, dmwalker said:

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?

 

Looked like a preprogramed maneuver to me, to avoid the tower. there was no issue with the initial trajectory. 

 

2 hours ago, Doug47 said:

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. 😛

 

 

 

No, you aren't closer. As said, 221 rockets launched successfully, serving the ISS, taking astronauts to the ISS and launching satellites, and in 2023 estimated to be responsible for 80% of all launches, isn't "a few rockets". As for the "big rockets" its a prototype, there was no intention or possibility of developing a perfect, fully functional, reusable 150 ton cargo capacity vehicle, capable of landing on the Moon in one go, in one attempt. Literally nobody would be able to achieve that. This was the first launch, fully staked. As for Musk, some of the things he does I like, and some of the things he does I don't like, but that's nothing to do with the erroneous comments you previously made and fact.

3 hours ago, martin-w said:

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

Okay, but still not quite "old" yet when it was launched:

Quote

first production car to be launched into deep space, carried by a Falcon Heavy rocket in a test flight on February 6, 2018.

 

2 hours ago, Doug47 said:

ok, they send a few little rockets that go up, then back down? 

I'd hardly count the Falcon Heavy a "little rocket" any more than I'd consider the 747 as a "little airplane..." 🤨

30 minutes ago, martin-w said:

No, you aren't closer...

...but that's nothing to do with the erroneous comments you previously made and fact.

Remind me, what did the three Billy Goats Gruff meet at the bridge again??

18 hours ago, Doug47 said:

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

Sorry Elon, leave it to the experts. 

You may not remember the early days at NASA and others:

 

Looks like Musk has tweeted...

"3 months ago we started building a massive water cooled steel plate to go under the launch mount. Wasn't ready in time and we wrongly thought, based on static fire data, that Fondag would make it through 1 launch. Looks like we can be ready to launch again in 2 months".

Edit: Fondag is a super tough concrete formulated to withstand fire erosion and thermal shock.

The steel plate fire divertor is partially constructed and on site. 

SpaceX are currently building a launch site at Cape Canaveral. 

Edited April 22, 20233 yr by martin-w

2 hours ago, n4gix said:

Okay, but still not quite "old" yet when it was launched:

 

Guess it depends how you define old. It was ten years old. The Roadster was Tesla's first electric car. 

2 hours ago, goates said:

Remind me, what did the three Billy Goats Gruff meet at the bridge again??

 

😆

17 minutes ago, martin-w said:

we wrongly thought, based on static fire data, that Fondag would make it through 1 launch

"Fondag concrete shows good workability followed by a rapid hardening and allows users to resume operations as early as 8 to 10 hours after application. It is resistant to temperatures from -180°C to +1100°C and thermal shocks."

The following comments are from 3 years ago so I don't know if they are applicable today:

"I saw the photo's from BocaChica Gal when they were building the launch pad. The pad is thin, no more than 300mm deep, and reinforced with standard sheet mesh used in most house slabs"

"In humid environments like Boca Chica, the top layer of concrete contains more than the usual amount of moisture, due to humidity, and temperature. (not necessarily rain). Humidity and possibly rain penetrates the concrete through these channels and just sits there until a hot dry day. But always some remains up to 10% concrete volume can be moisture."

"Now, subject that concrete to 2,810 °C; the temperature of the exhaust from a Sea Level Raptor for a Starship or SS/SH launch for 5 seconds."

"All moisture in the concrete for some depth will boil. No fast way to get out. The concrete explodes and violently, and huge shards explode outwards at considerable and damaging speed propelled by basically a steam explosion. 1 ml (literally a drop) of water creates 1.6 liters of steam heated to those temperatures."

 

https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2023/4/22/2165317/-A-Starship-Post-mortem-Why-the-giant-rocket-failed-and-why-it-s-Elon-Musk-s-fault

10 hours ago, Mike A said:

https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2023/4/22/2165317/-A-Starship-Post-mortem-Why-the-giant-rocket-failed-and-why-it-s-Elon-Musk-s-fault

 

I wouldn't pay too much attention to that article Mike. It wrongly stated Musk didn't want a flame divertor and that was why one wasn't included. When in reality the water cooled flame divertor is on site but wasn't completed in time for the launch. The data suggested the Fondag would last one launch, but it didn't.

Two years ago Musk tweeted that they were considering not having a flame divertor "but it was probably a mistake". No doubt why they began its construction. Pretty sure they would have began construction sooner if the previous test data had been accurate.

Worth remembering that Nasa have scheduled the Moon landing for 2025, so there's a lot of pressure on SpaceX to have the Starship Lander ready by then. Personally, I think its a crazily close deadline. 

 

The article also claims the launch was a failure, which is incorrect. 

Edited April 23, 20233 yr by martin-w

10 hours ago, dmwalker said:

"I saw the photo's from BocaChica Gal when they were building the launch pad. The pad is thin, no more than 300mm deep, and reinforced with standard sheet mesh used in most house slabs"

 

Two years ago was the Starship tests. Not including the booster, the full stack. So I'd assume it was relaid much thicker.