Anonymous Sources: Starship Needs a Major Rebuild After Two Consecutive Failures (behindtheblack.com)
- Reference: 0176679499
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/03/11/2159228/anonymous-sources-starship-needs-a-major-rebuild-after-two-consecutive-failures
- Source link: https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/anonymous-sources-starship-will-need-a-major-rebuild-after-two-consecutive-failures/
> According to information [2]at this tweet from anonymous sources, parts of Starship will [3]likely require a major redesign due to the [4]spacecraft's break-up shortly after stage separation on its last two test flights. These are the key take-aways, most of which focus on the redesign of the first version of Starship (V1) to create the V2 that flew unsuccessfully on those flights:
>
> - Hot separation also aggravates the situation in the compartment.
> - Not related to the flames from the Super Heavy during the booster turn.
> - This is a fundamental miscalculation in the design of the Starship V2 and the engine section.
> - The fuel lines, wiring for the engines and the power unit will be urgently redone.
> - The fate of S35 and S36 is still unclear. Either revision or scrap.
> - For the next ships, some processes may be paused in production until a decision on the design is made.
> - The team was rushed with fixes for S34, hence the nervous start. There was no need to rush.
> - The fixes will take much longer than 4-6 weeks.
> - Comprehensive ground testing with long-term fire tests is needed. [emphasis mine]
>
> It must be emphasized that this information comes from leaks from anonymous sources, and could be significantly incorrect. It does however fit the circumstances, and suggests that the next test flight will not occur in April but will be delayed for an unknown period beyond.
[1] https://slashdot.org/~schwit1
[2] https://x.com/HalcyonHypnotic/status/1898251889239617821
[3] https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/anonymous-sources-starship-will-need-a-major-rebuild-after-two-consecutive-failures/
[4] https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/03/07/0422209/spacexs-latest-starship-test-flight-ends-with-another-explosion
Well (Score:1)
Now we know the real reason why the president of the putin state in America is trying to dismantle NASA as well.
Read its lips: no more competition.
Normal engineering problems (Score:1)
Not sure if this is genuine, but whatever: Spacex rushed a fix, paid the price, now have to take a step back and redesign.
Happens to the best of us, no biggy.
I do wonder why they didn't see this harmonic problem ( or whatever it actually is ) in the longer static fires or in their simulations?
Re: (Score:2)
Yup. It'll be interesting to see how long it takes them to iterate until they arrive at an acceptable design that's safe enough for transportation of humans to space and back.
Best,
Re: (Score:2)
SpaceX has been rapidly and successfully solving such problems for over 20 years now. They'll deal with this in a few months and it will work great. That's the whole point of these tests.
Re: (Score:2)
> SpaceX has been rapidly and successfully solving such problems for over 20 years now. They'll deal with this in a few months and it will work great. That's the whole point of these tests.
Oh have they instead been "making guesses" and "getting lucky".
I have no idea what happened nor no inside track to anybody working for SpaceX but the first failure was completely understandable, the second which appears to be almost if not exactly the same issue, is "concerning" - In particular, if they knew they didn't und
Re: Normal engineering problems (Score:2)
But von Braun's designs never really where taking reusability into account. Also, you really think von Braun's designs worked flawlessly the first time around? Think again.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, so it is almost like cutting corners during design and testing may hide serious problems, even major design issues until later in flight?
Who'd have thunk it?
Re: (Score:2)
that's they way this type of designing works, fast itterations centering on specific parts of the ship. Test it, and see if those parts were working as specified, and see what else might happen and learn from it. Many rocket companies just keep designing and only theoretically testing it using computer models (which BTW is what SpaceX also does) without actually testing it for real, and try to have a perfect rocket when its first testflight is done, but in most cases that first testflight never is perfect.
Re: (Score:2)
Because anonymous comments shouldn't actually even be possible? There are hardly any places on internet where you can post anymous things, so why should slashdot still do it?
3rd times the charm (Score:2)
The important thing to remember with Starship is that the last two flights incorporated an entirely new design.with multiple experiments. These were fundamentally new rockets largely unlike their largely successful prior versions. Rather than a tweak of a nearly successful version to fix a few things we saw major changes one or two of which unfortunately is causing some catastrophic problems. They never got this far, but even just the tile system included probably a hundred different experiments.
Unfortuna
Um (Score:1)
Thanks for the ... er, random anonymous tweet?
(I guess there needs to be some pretext for the two-minute hate today?)
Musk'll Fix It! (Score:3)
Rocket Man aka Real Tony Stark (tm) will build it out impreg...er, impervious nanotech once he rids America of DEI
Re:Musk'll Fix It! (Score:4, Insightful)
Musk is too busy making up imaginary savings of money cancelling contracts which have already been disbursed... that's more than a full time job. He has no time to run hid companies, nor any apparent inclination to do so - he's already got his billions.
Re: (Score:2)
> Musk is too busy making up imaginary savings of money cancelling contracts which have already been disbursed... that's more than a full time job. He has no time to run hid companies, nor any apparent inclination to do so - he's already got his billions.
I think the more important factor may be Musk's obvious grandiosity. His clear mental illness and its fallout may have been quietly infecting SpaceX and its culture over a period of years.
I find it hard to believe that the guy who has made such a disastrous and destructive foray into politics, and who in three months has caused a 50% drop in Tesla's share price, hasn't also damaged SpaceX along the way to where he finds himself now. Just yesterday he said "As a function of the great policies of President Tr
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What is this DEI that you're talking about?
Donald, Erik and Ivanka grafting from pop's presidency?
It is, indeed, a huge problem, but which "leftie" is "pretending" it isn't?
Re: (Score:1)
Man, that was brutal. Well put. Extremely well put.
Re:Musk'll Fix It! (Score:4, Insightful)
The difference is we have ample evidence that global warming is a problem. Do you have ample evidence of DEI being a problem? I mean something other than "bad thing happened while a black person was in charge"?
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, we could tell that you were an idiot without you having to supply an explicit label.
Re:Musk'll Fix It! (Score:4, Interesting)
Bad things happen when your hiring decisions are done according to box ticking, rather than competence.
Bad things happen, when you force companies to hire from "special groups" to reach certain quotas from a biased pool (e.g. engineers), destroying the achievements of those that are part of that special group and got there because they are *good*, rather than *special*.
Bad things happen when you take a mckinsey report and read it backwards. Successful companies are more diverse because successful companies are big and can afford to hire globally. Success leads to diversity in the workforce. Not the other way around.
Re: (Score:1)
An interesting thesis.
Care to substantiate it with something concrete, starting with definite evidence that hiring decisions are indeed influenced by "box ticking" instead of competence in a major way?
Be specific.
Thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Far worse things happen when you hire based on nepotism and whatever the hell criteria Musk used to staff DOGE.
Re: Musk'll Fix It! (Score:1)
I can tell you've never worked in a position of seniority in a large company in your life. The halls of real decision making is basically like Narnia to you.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, DEI oversight costs money doesn't it? Think of it as a tariff on domestic products.
Re: Musk'll Fix It! (Score:2)
I did not know SpaceX supported (or had supported) DEI hires. You might be onto something there.
Re: (Score:2)
> Lefties pretending DEI isn't a problem == Righties pretending global warming isn't a problem.
Even if you cast DEI as deadly - and I can see arguments on both sides - there's no fucking way it represents an existential threat to our civilization. Global warming DOES represent such a threat.
Positing any kind of equivalency between global warming and DEI is either dishonest or stupid, and possibly both.