Skip to content

Elon Musk’s SpaceX Starship explodes on test stand

Technology
51 28 178
  • ... And we need 25k space tickets why? For a cool selfie?

    Why go anywhere in the world? It's all about the experience man, 25k to have experienced being in space is an incredibly unique and cool experience is it not?

  • ... And we need 25k space tickets why? For a cool selfie?

    I understand from your comment that, within your limited capacity, it is actually hard , next to impossible even, to imagine the benefits of having cheap orbital and suborbital transportation and infrastructure.

    I imagine it must be difficult living that way so I just want to say you are very brave by raising awareness to such disabilities, keep at it, champ, you are doing a great job

  • Why go anywhere in the world? It's all about the experience man, 25k to have experienced being in space is an incredibly unique and cool experience is it not?

    Because the world has actual things in it like people, wildlife, culture and history. Space has none of those things. Unless you're there working as a scientist to study things that can't be studied on earth, it's pointless.

    As of now it's a glorified roller coaster. At its best private space travel could be Disneyland in space. At worst it's just rich people paying to be carried up mount everest for clout but with exponentially more resources wasted.

  • I understand from your comment that, within your limited capacity, it is actually hard , next to impossible even, to imagine the benefits of having cheap orbital and suborbital transportation and infrastructure.

    I imagine it must be difficult living that way so I just want to say you are very brave by raising awareness to such disabilities, keep at it, champ, you are doing a great job

    I understand from your comment that you've read too many sci-fi books to understand what a massive resource sink that would be with negligible benefit. It's pretty basic physics.

    We've already got cheap transportation, look how that's turning out for the planet. But I'm sure burning God knows how much energy to launch more junk into space will save the world.

    We're already approaching a critical mass of private equity space trash in orbit, what's a few more lowest-bidder megastructures? At least the ultra rich will get their life rafts while we burn.

  • I understand from your comment that, within your limited capacity, it is actually hard , next to impossible even, to imagine the benefits of having cheap orbital and suborbital transportation and infrastructure.

    I imagine it must be difficult living that way so I just want to say you are very brave by raising awareness to such disabilities, keep at it, champ, you are doing a great job

    How difficult is it to communicate to others without letting your ego get in the way? I swear, you people act like literal children sometimes haha

  • Early analysis suggests that one of the high-pressure nitrogen gas tanks in the cargo bay ruptured. This would be unrelated to the rocketry aspects of Starship, those tanks are pretty plain vanilla technology and if this is actually what happened it's weird because those tanks are rated for way higher safety margins.

    Maybe. Regardless, problem either in design or build.

    Designing under-reinforced tanks indicates that the design can’t make payload and they’re cutting too far into structure allocations to make up for it.

    Rupture could also be poor materials (sign of Boeing-style disregard for standards and safety) or a bad weld (same plus maybe training issues on the line). Means they’re running bad QA/QC protocols if the faulty material/construction made it to flight.

    Chasing performance at the cost of safety sounds right down Musk’s alley.

  • Nice. Now they know how to not build that specific one

    Trial and error correction people

    The best thing is that these launchs are getting cheaper with time

    The falcon 9 has an internal launch cost per kilogram of about 1000 USD/KG

    If they get starship right (and all evidence points to it getting ready soon) internal launch cost is estimated to be between 200 to 300 USD/KG

    We are very close to seeing 25k USD or less tickets to space

    Get ready for the future bois, it won't wait for you

    Oh c’mon.

    Cannot possibly spin “blew up randomly during test prep” as a positive outcome. They probably don’t know how not to build that specific one unless they happened to instrument the faulty prop system components - they know that it failed but likely not why or how to fix it.

    All evidence points to Starship having a super-finicky MPS that fails on the regular… which probably means they’re chasing performance by removing mass from the MPS and tank structure… which means either this design doesn’t work (totally possible) or that the as-built performance falls short of what was promised.

    If you want to stan for Musk, I guess everyone has a type and I’m not going to shame you over it… but blowing up during test prep is not a good news story.

  • I'm making a note here: Huge Success

    It's hard to overstate my satisfaction.

  • Maybe. Regardless, problem either in design or build.

    Designing under-reinforced tanks indicates that the design can’t make payload and they’re cutting too far into structure allocations to make up for it.

    Rupture could also be poor materials (sign of Boeing-style disregard for standards and safety) or a bad weld (same plus maybe training issues on the line). Means they’re running bad QA/QC protocols if the faulty material/construction made it to flight.

    Chasing performance at the cost of safety sounds right down Musk’s alley.

    No, not necessarily a problem in either of those things. As I said, it ruptured way below the pressure the tank was rated for - nothing wrong with the design there. And I don't know if it's been explicitly confirmed or not, but those tanks get tested above that pressure before they get installed. The ship had already done a single-engine test firing so it must have actually been pressured up to that already when it did that previously.

    It sounds to me like something happened that damaged the tank after it was already in place. That would be my guess. Something banged into it and nobody noticed.

  • No, not necessarily a problem in either of those things. As I said, it ruptured way below the pressure the tank was rated for - nothing wrong with the design there. And I don't know if it's been explicitly confirmed or not, but those tanks get tested above that pressure before they get installed. The ship had already done a single-engine test firing so it must have actually been pressured up to that already when it did that previously.

    It sounds to me like something happened that damaged the tank after it was already in place. That would be my guess. Something banged into it and nobody noticed.

    SpaceX playing soccer with COPVs and then bolting them on the vehicle doesn’t feel like a more comforting answer but I agree it’s one I didn’t list. Not sure I understand why people would be rattling around inside the vehicle after a single engine test and then not re-running the single engine for a regression test.

    /shrug, still you’re right. Unreported damage post-installation would totally do this, it’s just not a root cause I’ve seen. Would speak to a breakdown in safety culture for my folks, not sure what the safety culture looks like on the Starship line.

  • Here are two Toyota vehicles randomly bursting into flames. Toyota makes shitty cars (ranked 3rd most reliable by consumerreports.org, btw). https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/who-makes-the-most-reliable-cars-a7824554938/

    Are the cars shitty, or are they ranked 3rd?

  • Video game actors' strike officially ends after AI deal

    Technology technology
    11
    1
    104 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    paraphrand@lemmy.worldP
    huh, interesting! It’s The Mythical Man-Month! That book was published back in 1975. They definitely know better, but must be in quite a pickle.
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 59 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    C
    "mistakes"
  • 7 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    33 Aufrufe
    db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comD
    VC-backed OpenAI is the most valuable company in the world and is engaging in massive environmental destruction. The US state just went into cahoots with them to the tune of billions VC-backed Uber and AirBnb disrupted multiple estabilished industries for the worst by undercutting them through loss-leading. VC-backed Facebook killed or purchased all its rivals and consolidated almost all social media to the detriment of the whole world.
  • $20 for us citizens

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Hands-On: EufyMake E1 UV Printer

    Technology technology
    18
    1
    38 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    69 Aufrufe
    S
    I watched a bit of Michael Alm's video on this, but noped out when I saw all of the little boxes of consumables appearing. If regular printer ink is already exorbitant, I can only imagine what these proprietary cartridges will cost.
  • 1 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    37 Aufrufe
    L
    I think the principle could be applied to scan outside of the machine. It is making requests to 127.0.0.1:{port} - effectively using your computer as a "server" in a sort of reverse-SSRF attack. There's no reason it can't make requests to 10.10.10.1:{port} as well. Of course you'd need to guess the netmask of the network address range first, but this isn't that hard. In fact, if you consider that at least as far as the desktop site goes, most people will be browsing the web behind a standard consumer router left on defaults where it will be the first device in the DHCP range (e.g. 192.168.0.1 or 10.10.10.1), which tends to have a web UI on the LAN interface (port 8080, 80 or 443), then you'd only realistically need to scan a few addresses to determine the network address range. If you want to keep noise even lower, using just 192.168.0.1:80 and 192.168.1.1:80 I'd wager would cover 99% of consumer routers. From there you could assume that it's a /24 netmask and scan IPs to your heart's content. You could do top 10 most common ports type scans and go in-depth on anything you get a result on. I haven't tested this, but I don't see why it wouldn't work, when I was testing 13ft.io - a self-hosted 12ft.io paywall remover, an SSRF flaw like this absolutely let you perform any network request to any LAN address in range.
  • 0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    33 Aufrufe
    P
    I applaud this, but I still say it's not far enough. Adjusted, the amount might match, but 121.000 is still easier to cough up for a billionaire than 50 is for a single mother of two who can barely make ends meet