** The Official Space Flight Thread - The Space Station and Beyond **

Colonel_Klinck said:
That might all be true but it doesn't explain how NASA could think signing a contract for a rocket that requires between 12-16 other rockets to just refuel is was a good idea. "Elon Time" isn't the issue here, physics is. If NASA signed a contract knowing the company couldn't deliver what was promised then Congress should be calling them in to explain themselves.
Click to expand...
Whos saying they cant deliver? We are talking about a company that has completely revolutionised the space sector. They have the most successful launch platform ever created. Yes Starship HLS is a different beast, but just because it goes about it in a different way, dosnt mean its wrong or wont work. NASA have wasted much more money on much more ridiculous projects.
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
That might all be true but it doesn't explain how NASA could think signing a contract for a rocket that requires between 12-16 other rockets to just refuel is was a good idea. "Elon Time" isn't the issue here, physics is. If NASA signed a contract knowing the company couldn't deliver what was promised then Congress should be calling them in to explain themselves.
Click to expand...

That's the funny part, how NASA, who's full of engineers believed Musk's claims about starship performance

Then again it comes down to who made what decision because NASA management has a history of not listening to its engineers
 
Last edited:
If you want
steve45 said:
Whos saying they cant deliver? We are talking about a company that has completely revolutionised the space sector. They have the most successful launch platform ever created. Yes Starship HLS is a different beast, but just because it goes about it in a different way, dosnt mean its wrong or wont work. NASA have wasted much more money on much more ridiculous projects.
Click to expand...

Starship itself has only made it to space (barely) twice. Starship HLS exists as nothing but CGI as far as I can tell. SpaceX need to demonstrate they can do propellant transfer in orbit, then actually get 20 of them up there to give HLS enough fuel to get to the moon.

This is scheduled to happen by the end of next year, and even NASA don’t think they can do it.

 
Penfold101 said:
If you want


Starship itself has only made it to space (barely) twice. Starship HLS exists as nothing but CGI as far as I can tell. SpaceX need to demonstrate they can do propellant transfer in orbit, then actually get 20 of them up there to give HLS enough fuel to get to the moon.

This is scheduled to happen by the end of next year, and even NASA don’t think they can do it.
Click to expand...
Meanwhile SpaceX are ticking off milestones in its development. Lets not forget that its largely been hampered by huge delays from Government organisations. Whilst I dont see it hitting current Sept 26 "schedule" for boots on the moon, I still see it as NASA's best shot at getting there.
This is breaking new ground. Lets not forget that SpaceX is practically propping up NASA's entire space program at the moment. Nasa's own launch system costs a good chunk of what has been awarded to SpaceX and its one and done. We'll see in a couple of years time, but I think things are going to ramp up considerably over the next year. We will likely see development explode and milestones be knocked down one after another. Personally I dont think we'll see boots on the moon for another 3/4 years. However IMO I see HLS as a smaller but not insignificant part of the Starship project. Starship will be a revolutionary launch platform, just as Falcon has proved to be.
 
Last edited:
steve45 said:
Whos saying they cant deliver? We are talking about a company that has completely revolutionised the space sector. They have the most successful launch platform ever created. Yes Starship HLS is a different beast, but just because it goes about it in a different way, dosnt mean its wrong or wont work. NASA have wasted much more money on much more ridiculous projects.
Click to expand...

You think in the next decade SpaceX will be in a position to launch 17 Starships in say 4 days? They are supposed to be able to do it in 2 years. No one is saying SpaceX hasn't been great for the space industry. Its just that Starship to the Moon is incredible inefficient and there are better options. If they reach the stage of actually wanting to make a Moon base then such a heavy lift ship would make sense but for 4 humans it doesn't.

Yes NASA has wasted money, a big part of that is because every Senator and Congressman wants a chuck of that public money spent in their state/district, which makes the process much less efficient.

Not sure if you've seen this but Destin nails it.

 
Colonel_Klinck said:
You think in the next decade SpaceX will be in a position to launch 17 Starships in say 4 days? They are supposed to be able to do it in 2 years.
Click to expand...
In the next decade, yeah absolutely, completely within the realms of possibility. In the next two years not so much. They might not be on the original time line however time will be the judge if they achieve the end goal. The future looks bright.
 
Last edited:
@Colonel_Klinck That's a good video I watched it a few weeks ago. I would say though that StarShip HLS supports a wider ecosystem for Moon exploration. It is a demanding route to the Moon for just a boots on the ground photo op mission, but once the Gateway is there it will also be useful/essential for supporting reusable solutions from other companies. Having a vehicle that can tug vast quantities of propellant to the Gateway allows smaller landers to perform multiple trips. In addition the load capacity of HLStarship means will be essential for setting up a long duration base. It's also easy to imagine using them as the bodies for Moon habitats. Repurposing 30m by 9m of pressure vessel into habitat is probably quite feasible.
 
Last edited:
steve45 said:
In the next decade, yeah absolutely, completely within the realms of possibility. In the next two years not so much. They might not be on the original time line however time will be the judge if they achieve the end goal. The future looks bright.
Click to expand...


I can remember years ago when Elon first announced starship and back then it was marketed as 2 launches all the way to Mars with 100 passengers, fast forward almost a decade and it's become 17 launches to the Moon and no doubt it's not 100 passengers anymore

So much for Elon's hope of 100 times superior claims
 
Last edited:
Grim5 said:
I can remember years ago when Elon first announced starship and back then it was marketed as 2 launches all the way to Mars with 100 passengers, fast forward almost a decade and it's become 17 launches to the Moon and no doubt it's not 100 passengers anymore

So much for Elon's hope of 100 times superior claims
Click to expand...

True. He always does that. But who else is doing better than spacex? Does anyone even come close?

SpaceX is the last of his companies that has any respect I think. Tesla used to be desirable. But now has become the opposite. For me anyway.
 
TNA said:
True. He always does that. But who else is doing better than spacex? Does anyone even come close?

SpaceX is the last of his companies that has any respect I think. Tesla used to be desirable. But now has become the opposite. For me anyway.
Click to expand...

It is an incredible company. I don't think anyone would deny that. Doesn't mean people should accept that everything Elon says about it is true. He is the ultimate salesman, promises the earth next year and money flows in. That his companies don't actually deliver it even 5 years later is irrelevant as he says they already have and he has an army of supporters who are almost evangelical in that support.
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
It is an incredible company. I don't think anyone would deny that. Doesn't mean people should accept that everything Elon says about it is true. He is the ultimate salesman, promises the earth next year and money flows in. That his companies don't actually deliver it even 5 years later is irrelevant as he says they already have and he has an army of supporters who are almost evangelical in that support.
Click to expand...
You have an entire thread to obsess and whinge about Elon, keep it there please.
 
Just been reading about more Starliner's problems. Had 5 thrusters fail while trying to dock with the ISS. 5 of the 28 thrusters. They got all but one of them back, but still...

Boeing really need to do better.
 
I wonder what happens with complete engine failure where they can't dock and they can't get back to earth, has it ever happened?
 
When Starliner is released from the booster, it’s not in a stable orbit. If the thrusters fail to fire, it’ll passively re-enter the atmosphere of its own accord. I don’t know what happens if they all fail halfway through the circularisation burn but seeing as the ISS still orbits inside the atmosphere and has to boost itself back up on a regular basis it would eventually do a full re-entry. I’ve no idea how long that would take though.

NASA will have thought of this though - there were plans for all stages of engine failure in the Space Shuttle ascent profile, and runways around the world it could land on. The Apollo capsule had multiple ways to be separated from the lander when it left the moon, and the engine was a hypergolic one which needed no ignition system to keep it as simple as possible.

No-one is YOLOing space…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom