quote:Originally posted by Headshot: Perhaps NASA needs to get someone else to do the job... and soon.
Even that which feels routine now once was not. Remember this video?
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54365 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-07-2025 12:20 PM
quote:Originally posted by teopze: As if there was anyone else to do the job...
By NASA contract, there is: Blue Origin's Blue Moon lander is contracted to fly on Artemis V. The company is planning to fly a prototype of the lander to the moon as soon as later this year.
That said, I wouldn't count out SpaceX just yet.
dom Member
Posts: 1121 From: Registered: Aug 2001
posted 03-07-2025 01:18 PM
Whenever I watch this launched it reminds me of the Soviet N-1. Strangely, this test program is mirroring that rocket exactly.
issman1 Member
Posts: 1162 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
posted 03-07-2025 02:53 PM
quote:Originally posted by denali414: Sabotage? By whom?
Rivals of SpaceX or somebody working at SpaceX resentful of Musk.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54365 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-31-2025 02:37 PM
The FAA has closed its mishap investigation into Flight 7 on March 28, 2025 (the Flight 8 investigation remains open).
The FAA-required investigation of the SpaceX Starship Flight 7 mishap on Jan. 16 is closed. There were no public injuries and one confirmed report of minor vehicle damage in the Turks and Caicos Islands.
The FAA oversaw and accepted the findings of the SpaceX-led investigation. The final mishap report cites the probable root cause for the loss of the Starship vehicle was stronger than anticipated vibrations during flight led to increased stress on, and failure of, the hardware in the propulsion system. SpaceX identified 11 corrective actions to prevent a reoccurrence of the event. The FAA verified that SpaceX implemented corrective actions prior to Flight 8.
Headshot Member
Posts: 1391 From: Vancouver, WA, USA Registered: Feb 2012
posted 03-31-2025 04:45 PM
So SpaceX identified 11 corrective actions due to the mishaps on Super Heavy Test Flight 7 and implemented those corrective actions BEFORE Test Flight 8 occurred. However Test Flight 8's mishaps mirrored those of Test Flight 7. So in reality, either SpaceX did not thoroughly investigate the nature of the mishap, or they implemented the corrective actions incorrectly. Either way, this certainly puts a crimp in SpaceX's lunar lander program and the flight of Artemis III.
I did read, on another site, that as of mid-March there were 86 to 100 job open listings for engineers, specifically for Starship, on the SpaceX career's website.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54365 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-31-2025 04:59 PM
Correlation does not imply causation.
While Starship was lost at around the same time on both tests, it does not necessarily mean that the two vehicles were lost for the same reason(s). SpaceX could have implemented all of the changes successfully between the two flights and still lost Flight 8 due to an entirely separate failure mode.
Without access to the data SpaceX has, it is really impossible to say what happened, other than the FAA was satisfied with SpaceX's actions after Flight 7 (and most likely will be the same after they close the investigation into Flight 8).
It should also be said that SpaceX said it was planning to push Starship to its limits on these test flights, so the configuration flying and the failures they experienced may have little to no bearing on the human landing system version of Starship, in so much that it will fly in a more conservative configuration.
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3823 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 03-31-2025 05:38 PM
quote:Originally posted by Robert Pearlman: ...Without access to the data SpaceX has, it is really impossible to say what happened.
Agreed. But as I recall watching live coverage of two VERY similar-looking losses, I can't help imagining SpaceX marching an army over a bridge which collapses due to sympathetic vibrations; then fixing the bridge and marching the army back over, only to see the bridge again collapsing.
I'm not sure how far I can push the analogy, but I seem to remember the solution to the bridge problem was not repairs to the bridge, but a command to troops to "break step" while marching over bridges.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54365 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-31-2025 07:00 PM
The thing is, during this point of its test flight regiment, SpaceX may not mind losing the bridge so long as the data they collect shows them why.
Starship was not going to be recovered on Flight 7 or Flight 8 regardless the outcome, and the company has a lot of experience with propulsive landing approaches already. The real unknowns are in the transition to and from orbit. The losses may be teaching them more about the vehicle than were both flights to have flown all the way to soft landings in the Indian Ocean.
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3823 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 03-31-2025 09:06 PM
Again, agreed... but I just hope someone in SpaceX, after Flight 8, didn't say: "S**t! I was SURE we'd fixed that. What on Earth do we do now?"
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54365 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 04-03-2025 04:15 PM
Flight 9 will include the first reflight of a Super Heavy booster. From SpaceX:
This booster previously launched and returned on Flight 7 and 29 of its 33 Raptor engines are flight proven.
posted 03-07-2025 12:17 PM
advertisement