Musk did something wrong he purchased a social media platform and some now have a problem with him. say no more,

5 minutes ago, G-RFRY said:

some now have a problem with him

 

Some have always had a problem with him, no matter what he does. 😀

2 hours ago, martin-w said:

Some have always had a problem with him, no matter what he does.

A friend of mine referred to Musk as a seagull.  He tells people what to do and flies away.  When they are done the seagull returns and spits all over it.  Then he flies away to start something new or spit all over another project he started.

Noel

Edited April 24, 20233 yr by birdguy

15 minutes ago, birdguy said:

He tells people what to do and flies away.

 

Not a good analogy. When the Model 3 production was close to bankrupting the company, he sold his properties to raise funds and slept in his office overnight. He then built a small mobile home on the grounds and slept in that. He's "hands on" he doesn't fly away. Some would say too hands on. He has an 80 hour work week, sometimes more, he rarely stops, that's not "flying away". It is unhealthy though. When you see him in interviews he looks constantly tired. He does suffer from autistic spectrum disorder, of which obsession's are a common symptom, so I guess that goes some way to explain it. 

5 hours ago, martin-w said:

From what was said, it was the previous static fire data that suggested that the  Fondag could handle one launch. We will never know if that was true or if, as you say, it was optimistically interpreted. 

Sounds like the static fire test was only done at half thrust, so probably wasn't as representative as they thought.

As for the lessons I'm referring to, it's the effects of the rocket's exhaust and noise on the launch pad and rocket itself. As it stands, I doubt there will be another launch in the couple months Musk thinks. Maybe waiting for the steel plates would have been better in the long run?

https://nitter.net/DrPhiltill/status/1649531875692617728#m

 

3 minutes ago, goates said:

Sounds like the static fire test was only done at half thrust, so probably wasn't as representative as they thought.

 

Yeah, I guess they tried to calculate what the increase in thrust  would  do based on the lower static fire thrust. Physics had other ideas. 

 

6 minutes ago, goates said:

As for the lessons I'm referring to, it's the effects of the rocket's exhaust and noise on the launch pad and rocket itself. As it stands, I doubt there will be another launch in the couple months Musk thinks. Maybe waiting for the steel plates would have been better in the long run?

 

I don't think they particularly cared about damage to the launch pad in previous Starship tests though. Was pretty speedy and easy to repair. Rapid prototyping of Starship was the previous objective rather than keeping the pad pristine. But yes, two months is "Elon Time" which is usually inaccurate. A previous SpaceX employee reckoned it would be more like 4 months, but we shall see. And I'm guessing the FAA will need to carry out another assessment. 

17 minutes ago, martin-w said:

I don't think they particularly cared about damage to the launch pad in previous Starship tests though. Was pretty speedy and easy to repair. Rapid prototyping of Starship was the previous objective rather than keeping the pad pristine.

The pad wasn't critical for the previous tests, but is an integral part of the full stack Starship vehicle launch and recovery. Unlike the vehicles themselves, rapid prototyping doesn't work quite as well for a large concrete and steel structure. If it can't withstand launches properly, they won't be able to get to the rapid turn around times they're aiming for.

I'm sure the FAA is a little concerned about the amount of debris from the pad that was flung hundreds of feet away.

5 minutes ago, goates said:

I'm sure the FAA is a little concerned about the amount of debris from the pad that was flung hundreds of feet away.

And I'm sure the population of Port Isabel will have a few words to say about that.

30 minutes ago, goates said:

The pad wasn't critical for the previous tests, but is an integral part of the full stack Starship vehicle launch and recovery

 

Well yes, I understood you meant Musk having a "track record of ignoring lessons learned" was in regard to damage to pads previously. The previous damage to the pad in testing wasn't an issue, as you say, but they did consider that with the full stack, so they did learn that lesson (not that they needed to) evidenced by designing a water cooled steel plate. In fact they have been  building the same water cooled steel plate deflector at their other launch locations. 

 

37 minutes ago, goates said:

Unlike the vehicles themselves, rapid prototyping doesn't work quite as well for a large concrete and steel structure. If it can't withstand launches properly, they won't be able to get to the rapid turn around times they're aiming for.

 

Indeed, hence why they were already building water cooled deflectors at all of their launch sites.  

 

38 minutes ago, goates said:

I'm sure the FAA is a little concerned about the amount of debris from the pad that was flung hundreds of feet away.

 

I've not heard much regarding this, so not sure how that will work. They did have a launch license for the next 5 years. So what happens now after the launch projected chunks of concrete great distances I'm not sure. Will it mean another full assessment, or will the FAA be happy with the inclusion of the water cooled deflector. Who knows. 

On 4/24/2023 at 9:34 PM, G-RFRY said:

Musk did something wrong he purchased a social media platform and some now have a problem with him. say no more,

Howard Hughes was a bit out there too, but yea he made the Spruce Goose among other things, Elon has made a few things fly too, crazy eclectic billionaires that changed the world and both with many character flaws too

21 hours ago, goates said:

Sounds like the static fire test was only done at half thrust, so probably wasn't as representative as they thought.

 

I've just learnt that the data that led them to believing the Fondag would survive was from the full power static test in February. 

4 hours ago, Matthew Kane said:

Howard Hughes was a bit out there too, but yea he made the Spruce Goose among other things

And how useful to the war effort was the H-4 Hercules with its first flight in November 1947? 😉

 

The launch on 4/20 (Cannabis Day) was seemingly timed for the memes, rather than timed for actual readiness of the launch pad with the protective steel plates.
That said, with big projects come big risks. It didn't work out for them this time, however, SpaceX is far ahead of the competition.

 

I highly recommend this Netflix 10 episode series "Away" starring Hilary Swank.  It's about the first Mars mission.  Take note at the end of the trailer, the way in which the ship lands.  It's using the Starship belly flop and then landing like the Starship.

 

3 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

I've just learnt that the data that led them to believing the Fondag would survive was from the full power static test in February. 

Where did you read that? Musk indicated the data was based on half thrust.

 

1 hour ago, goates said:

Where did you read that? Musk indicated the data was based on half thrust.

 

Saw it in a video this morning. The video must have got it wrong.

1:28 in the video. they must have got it wrong. 

 

 

Edited April 25, 20233 yr by martin-w