SpaceX's Starship shows resilience through brutally hot reentry to Earth | Mashable.
SpaceX's Starship shows resilience through brutally hot reentry
 |
| A view from the SpaceX Starship as it flew around Earth during its fourth test flight on June 6, 2024. Credit: SpaceX screenshot |
SpaceX's Starship showed stamina on Thursday, flying longer than ever before during its blistering return to Earth and even performed a key flip and landing burn before hitting water.
No injuries or property damages from falling debris were immediately known after the test.
Starship, a 400-foot-tall, super-heavy-lift rocket and spaceship, blasted off at 7:50 a.m. CT from SpaceX's private launchpad in South Texas. The test flight was the rocket system's fourth, broadcast on the company's website and X, the social platform acquired by the company's billionaire founder Elon Musk.
"It's safe to say she's getting a little beat up, but that's to be expected on a test flight," said Kate Tice, SpaceX's quality systems engineering manager, during Starship's descent. "We are still learning how to improve the ship for total survival and recovery of the high heat reentry."
The test comes a day after Boeing's new Starliner spaceship launched a pair of NASA astronauts into space for its first crewed test flight to the International Space Station. The legacy aerospace company's launch lagged four years behind the one for SpaceX's competing Crew Dragon capsule, perhaps giving the American public a newfound appreciation for SpaceX's engineering style and prowess.
Starship's one-hour test showed leaps in progress, achieving numerous objectives despite the atmosphere battering the ship before landing. The company has faced criticism for its previous test failures. Its executives insist that building fast, breaking expensive things, and learning from mistakes are all part of SpaceX's philosophy — in stark contrast with NASA's slower pace.
"Flight tests like today are the fastest possible route for us to dramatically improve Starship's capabilities. The Starship flying today has already seen a number of changes based on what we learned from flight test three in March, which was only two-and-a-half months ago," Tice said. "Development moves really fast here at SpaceX."
The primary goals of Thursday's test were for the spacecraft to survive the maximum heat of reentering Earth's atmosphere and to practice maneuvers for recovering the Super Heavy booster. SpaceX has incorporated a procedure called hot-staging, which involves reigniting engines while the craft is still attached to a partially lit booster, then returning the booster for a splashdown.
About nine minutes into flight, SpaceX teams erupted in whoops and applause as the booster successfully performed its operation, plopping into the Gulf of Mexico. It was the first time the booster had accomplished a soft water landing.
Starship then coasted for about 40 minutes in space at an altitude of 130 miles above Earth before trying a controlled reentry. The craft successfully flipped and initiated the engine burn before landing in the Indian Ocean, according to SpaceX's data, though camera views cut in and out during the descent.
A torrent of debris fell off the vehicle, as it appeared engulfed in flames, and the lens even cracked in the process. It's not clear yet how much of the ship was intact by the time it hit the water.
Overall, the test demonstrated enormous improvement over the third flight on March 14, when the extreme heat caused by air friction destroyed the ship early in its path back to Earth.
NASA will depend on Musk's rocket company to ferry astronauts to the lunar surface on a modified Starship for the Artemis III and IV moon missions under a $4.2 billion contract. To do that, SpaceX first has to master how to refuel its spaceship after it has already left the planet.
Three months ago, SpaceX flight controllers oversaw the transfer of several tons of liquid oxygen between tanks inside Starship. The demonstration was a preliminary test for in-space propellant transfers. In a news release, the company said the March demo was "successful," though it didn't elaborate on how much fuel it was able to move.
To make the rest of the quarter-million-mile journey to the moon, Starship would need to top off its tank. SpaceX plans to send up tanker versions of Starship into low-Earth orbit, establishing a space gas station of sorts. The passenger version of Starship would dock at a tanker to fill up.
NASA seemed satisfied with the outcome of Starship's flight on Thursday.
"Congratulations @SpaceX on Starship's successful test flight this morning!" said administrator Bill Nelson on X. "We are another step closer to returning humanity to the Moon through #Artemis—then looking onward to Mars."
The Federal Aviation Administration will investigate the anomalies that occurred during the test. It will then identify any changes SpaceX must make before it can fly Starship again.
Topics SpaceX
It was amazing!
ReplyDeletehttps://media.tenor.co/SEeWv1R0ZcYAAAAC/ethersec-flat-earth.gif?t=AAYaSeAQyWYA3j0VCQ1nvQ&c=VjFfZmFjZWJvb2s&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR0HrdXo_bPJFyABXnB4iFrD322dK6WTUuCuMTVKZ5CO-QjlMH5d8DaNXD0_aem_AS3EY-8iAMnAhjoywt0C-nvPUOqq6qNgZh_FOQhAE_Ng9rdWuZcGv3KiHmhkHOs6D45rWPuTgv1uKlulP5SgCqQb
ReplyDeleteWHY does our government hate Musk???
ReplyDeletethey did love him to the point until he declared that he was a Republican.
DeleteHe'll be back 'in the fold' soon!
Deletethe question is why does Musk hate government! It doesn't do to get confused!
Deletein what way do you think he hates gov.
Deleteoh yeah when he purchased Twitter that really pissed them off. So there's that!
DeleteHow is Elon Musk going to stop earth-like never ending wars on Mars after it is settled? 24 hour a day sensitivity training? He will never change human nature!
ReplyDeleteOh thats good! Maybe they can use this new technology on apollo 11 and others.
ReplyDeleteThings are kinda tough atm especially this time of year so as a way of helping out those facing challenges, I’m gifting 5 grand to anyone who message me with “PROGRESS” let’s spread love and end inhumanity
ReplyDeletescam
Deletehttps://giphy.com/gifs/esR1eKgmOnxWKR627f
ReplyDeleteNo difference that the space shuttle from 1977
ReplyDeleteexcept the plan is multiple flights per day with minimal maintenance, not once every 6 months at best after extensive repairs costing hundreds of millions and only taking off once the paperwork was stacked higher than the external disposable fuel tank. So maybe just a few differences 🤔
DeleteAll of that could have happened with the space shuttles IF they had an unlimited income these new rockets get
Deletenot a chance, as impressive a vehicle as the shuttle undoubtedly was it was also a deeply flawed, compromised and limited design. A technological dead end that was never going to lead to better things and trapped American manned space flight in low orbit for decades. It only flew 135 times in 30 years. Maybe as originally envisioned but too many cooks got involved, like the military with their silly requirements that were never used in the end. It was amazing it was possible, well done to the NASA etc designers but the shuttle only looked like the future because it was different from Apollo etc and we were told it was.
DeleteWhat is "teahnological"
DeleteAs America was in possession of nuclear power back in 1956, America had all the power it needed, and then some, to get nearly any size vehicle into space, to nearly all planets, quickly and efficiently.
America also had the knowledge to construct Starship Enterprise in the 1930's, which would have been built in space all those years ago as a stand alone spacecraft near the international space station until a dry dock could be constructed in space.
got to recommend the TV series, For All Mankind, a great alternative history of coulda, shoulda, post Apollo.
DeleteOK. So now you want to to do your research that only you know exactly where you found everything.
DeleteSounds like you have no real proof so you attempt to make others research your theories for you.
I literally have no idea where you are coming from. All i said was Shuttle was amazing but very flawed. And i recommended a good entertaining TV series on an alt history of the space programme after Apollo which is literally the genre of what you said when you stated that the space shuttle could have been improved etc.. Anyway I'm going back to sleep in New Zealand it's still early here on Saturday.
DeleteThe Starship also has a payload of around 120-150 metric tons. The Space shuttle had a payload of 24 metric tons. So a "slight" difference there.
DeleteSize only matters if those constructing these monsters come up with a plan and test, test, test. All of this could have been accomplished back in the 60's with unlimited income paying for the support and technology.
DeleteIncredible things were accomplished by NASA back in the 60s and 70s, and then they had the Space Shuttle in the 80s… but of course the stuff SpaceX is doing is on a completely different level in terms of the technology involved.
DeleteAnd of course no one has “unlimited income”, not in the 60s and not now.
Proof please
DeleteProof of what? That SpaceX is using more advanced technologies than they did in the 60s? 🤣
DeleteAll of your previous comment.
DeleteYou don’t agree that NASA accomplished incredible things in the 60s and 70s?
DeleteWhy yes they did, but at the same time, NASA was dependent on government funding. Funding today is substantially higher because private people and companies are also investing their money into projects to advance space travel.
DeleteThere is no way NASA had access to this in the past because they were working as part of our government and nothing private was allowed
NASA had much larger funding back then because of the Cold War and the competition with the Soviet Union. SpaceX is just much more efficient in how they use the money.
DeleteNonsense. Massive fail.
ReplyDeleteWhat a flight! Stupendous job by the SpaceX team!
ReplyDeleteWOW. One for the ages. That fiery reentry was probably the most exciting live stream since the first Falcon Heavy launch.
ReplyDeleteI recall Musk mentioning a couple of years ago that they were concerned about hot plasma getting into the flap hinges. It took a long time to get real world data, but I guess they were right!
Lets see how quickly they can get off another flight without a mishap investigation hanging over their heads...
ReplyDeleteAnd, even with [at least] one of the flaps burned off, they appear to have maintained sufficient control to meet flight plan
I would wager that every single spaceflight agency is eating up that reentry video.
ReplyDeleteI recall Musk mentioning a couple of years ago that they were concerned about hot plasma getting into the flap hinges.
ReplyDeleteI think targeting land before they have the TPS for the control surfaces figured out is way premature, while they got lucky and were able to maintain control this time they's no guarantee they'll be so fortunate next time and without control surfaces the cone of uncertainty has to be huge.
ReplyDeleteThe Booster and Ship are not the same and it's the Booster that's being talked about perhaps landing.
DeleteThey're targeting land for the boosters, which seems to have demonstrated a near-perfect simulated landing. Obviously it'll be a while before they look at recovering the Ship itself.
DeleteThe FAA updated their license so there are conditions where SpaceX is free from mishap investigations. TPS failure falls under that (as long as no one was in danger)
ReplyDeleteHow does jettisoning the interstage ring affect plans for reuse? This is the first I've heard of the SH+SS stack not being intended to be 100% reusable. Surely it'll make things more expensive and reduce flight rates if every flight needs a new staging ring.
ReplyDeleteIt's a temporary approach for now, pending integration of the hot staging interstage into Super Heavy with the V2 booster. Then the ring won't be jettisoned anymore.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteDid I misunderstand NSF or is it correct that SpaceX has already adjusted the location of the flaps on newer Ships to account for the plasma heating and tiles?
DeleteThat’s just temporary.
I recommend watching CSI Starbase's new video on youtube. He goes over all the additional mass that's been added to the booster since its landing propellant tanks were first designed. In short, the booster has gotten something like 25,000 kg heavier in the past couple of years (the hot stage ring is around 10,000 kg alone), so the landing tanks aren't big enough any more.
DeleteVersion 2 / Block 2 of the booster will have larger landing tanks as well as mass reduction improvements, so the hot staging hardware will be integrated and fully reusable.
A couple reasons:
DeleteSuperheavy uses a separate liquid oxygen tank for the landing burn. To account for the extra mass of the the interstage, this tank needs to be a bit larger. They can make that change (if they want) in future Superheavies, but the tanks for this and the next few upcoming Superheavies had been built long ago. See the CSI Starbase analysis.
The design of the interstage is likely to change in the future.
Edit: Fixed typo Starship → Superheavy
Surely it'll make things more expensive and reduce flight rates if every flight needs a new staging ring.
DeleteI think you seriously overestimate how much the ring costs and underestimate how fast SpaceX can make them. They can make an entire F9 second stage fast enough to launch every 3 days. I'm sure they can make multiple hot staging rings a day if they needed to, but it's irrelevant since this is still testing.
DeleteYeah, that was an interesting video from Zack, that all the learning corrections from IFT1 - IFT3 had added mass to the booster so they needed to jettison the 10 tons or so of the hot stage ring to give enough fuel margin to get the rest of the booster down safely but newer booster designs may have more header tankage /margin and possibly optimize some of the corrective measures to take the weight back out so the hot staging ring will not be discarded.
DeleteAlso thought that the conjecture that the hot staging ring on IFT3 tore loose as the booster hit one of the cloud layers at the point the grid fins went crazy and lost control authority was intriguing.
Edit: Gahhh, ninja'd upthread.
That was the most exciting launch and flight I have ever witnessed in my life. I'm not too embarrassed to admit I teared up when the Little Flap that Could hung on and helped get Starship to a water landing! So amazing to see in real time with such incredible onboard camera work.
ReplyDeleteIf you haven't watched the videos of the ascent, reentry, and landing, go watch them now. The views of the booster gently touching down on water, Starship reentry progressing, one of Starship's flaps progressively losing tiles and gradually melting in full view of the camera (with the camera lens eventually cracking) are incredible. The partially melted flap kept on moving and working for the entire mission! You can even see a bit of the Starship soft touchdown in the Indian ocean via the cracked, debris-covered lens.
ReplyDeleteRespect to the camera!
ReplyDeleteWell done SpaceX. A great step towards a game changing launch system!
ReplyDeleteWhat a treat that launch was. Been waiting for this article all day.
ReplyDeleteWatching SH booster re-enter, it looks like those grid fins were at their limit. Fighting with every ounce they had to maintain control authority and steer that booster. Would they need more powerful motors or an increase from 4 to 6 fins to make it more reliable so they don't slam the booster into the arms/tower?
ReplyDeleteSH comes in a lot hotter than F9 boosters so the grid fin buffeting is worse at maximum aerodynamic deacceleration. Control movement smoothness should improve as SpaceX dials in its GNC software based on flight data.
DeleteThe next version of the booster has fins that extend farther from the vehicle so they are more in the airstream when landing and of course their moment is farther out from the vehicle gaining control power. Also they will be 90% from each other.
DeleteThunderf00t in shambles
ReplyDeleteI saw clips of that, he actually had the nerve to call the SpaceX engineering team a bunch of "morons" for cheering during the landing. What a horrible human being.
DeleteHe's such a tool.
DeleteOTOH, Scott Manley (as usual) had an excellent recap.
https://imgur.com/a/1s3DYX1
ReplyDeleteI couldn't help but get a kick out of Dan Huot's face afterward and his line about needing to go regain his composure - that's the face of someone witnessing the most unbelievable thing they've ever seen and I'm pretty sure that's what my face looked like, too. Absolutely mind blowing.
Quite the impressive show throughout from SpaceX and Starship. It was unbelievable to watch the live feed as it came through the plasma belts. I know I wasn't alone because even the ladies providing commentary were blown away. It really made me realize how much SpaceX hasn't just transformed space travel itself, but also how it has altered how we consume space. The networks in the 60s found Americans got bored of astronaut antics in orbit, but these kind of videos really help reignite that attention, awe, and inspiration that is needed for the public to support costly programs.
ReplyDeleteI saw the glow as the plasma got in, started eating at the flap from the inside, felt locked in as it ate through the mounting, senselessly had this feeling like I didn't want it dying alone or something, I had to watch. No way I'd have been able to announce what happened next, jaws hanging open aren't much good at forming words. An Avasarala quote comes to mind, "This is something new."
ReplyDeleteThe fact that the flap held together despite beginning to break up was fascinating to watch.
ReplyDeleteIt takes a licking and keeps on ticking.
(Nobody else has used that slogan, right?)
I keep imaging some engineer at SpaceX going "Hmmm, a third of the flap burned away and yet it still worked. Must be over engineered, lets take off that corner for the next flight as we obviously don't need it!"
DeleteSo, maybe someone here with a better understanding of the math could help me out. Clearly, by all rational metrics, the booster is a viable product, even if expended (although I think confidence in the booster increased today, seeing it operate an engine down with no observable ill effect). If SpaceX were to develop (in parallel) an expendable 2nd stage, with three RVac and one center gimballing raptor, what kind of mass could we expect to a circular 300km orbit? If the cost per kg to orbit was less than Falcon 9, certainly this is a tangent worth pursuing, no? This could help with revenue generation while continuing the process of perfecting full stack recovery. Or is it just more in the company interest to start launching payloads with Ship, while perfecting the design?
ReplyDeleteThey could "easily" build an expendable Starship without tiles, fins, etc. and get at least 100t into such an orbit but likely 150t+ (much more so with next generation booster). I would suspect they would keep 6 engines for such a thing (3RV, 3R).
DeleteMy husband works in aerospace/defense and he was saying something similar. Basically creating a expendable 2nd stage to boost large segments of private space stations to orbit. He seemed to think the math and financials made sense, but he's French, so, you know.
DeleteI never thought I'd grow accustomed to seeing rocket boosters land vertically, but at this point it's par for the course with Falcon.
ReplyDeleteI may, one day, not marvel at seeing plasma curl around a space vehicle during reentry.
But it sure as heck ain't today.
It sounded really impressive from South Padre Island, but we only saw a flash at ignition and the rising Starship for a few seconds before it was lost to the fog and clouds. Guess I need to start making plans to come back for IFT-5!
ReplyDeleteI'm still not sure trying to catch the next booster is a great idea. But I could be persuaded. If they dent the OLM or tower on a missed landing, all testing is halted until repairs can be made.
ReplyDeleteOn the plus side:
SpaceX has lots of experience landing Falcon 9 first stages
Booster will have exhausted most of its fuel so a much smaller boom if things go wrong.
SpaceX was quick to repair the OLM/tower after IFT 1
On the cons:
Potentially no launches for multiple months depending on damage
Next booster or two will still be version 1s. Getting over the hurdle of catching is nice but these are old design and disposable boosters. They need to get to flying V2 ships soon while damaging the pad will slow that down. (There's NASA progress payments hinged on getting multiple V2s in orbit together)
You could see that hot spot form pretty early on. They're gonna have to reshape that surface (if they don't have a new design ready to go anyway).
ReplyDeleteAnd I'll argue the shock waves from the launch were even more awesone.
WoW!! Old Space and New Space made for thrilling video in just two days! I'm not sure if it gets any better than this, but I'm betting it will!
ReplyDeleteElon Musk.. kicking the crap out of gruberment stooges at NASA
ReplyDelete>$100,000,000 in federal and state subsidies well spent.
ReplyDeleteNASA's plan to move space launches to the private sector is working better than planned thanks to SpaceX. Who would have known an immigrant from South Africa, Elon Musk, who worked to start PayPal, then Tesla, would end up creating the most efficient space launch system ever seen.
DeleteNo other country can match SpaceX at this time, for the foreseeable future.
... and the best part of all... the very best part of all... this huge step forward for sustained & permanent ever-improving presence in Space does NOT involve Marxist Government nor Union Stoogery & Goonery & Toadery!
ReplyDeleteKeep going SpaceX! Let's start a new colony on Mars, and leave the Marxists to keep fouling their own nest, and try to gaslight everyone that they have to give ever more control to big inefficient corrupt governments, and give up all their freedoms, and be worthless lazy leeches dependent on big government stealing the hard-earned gains of the proficient and responsible.
Congrats to SpaceX Team!!!! 🚀
ReplyDeleteCongratulations, it's the word you didn't mention
ReplyDeleteIt's to generate more clicks, understand? You said exactly what they expected...
DeleteCongrats to SpaceX Team!!!!! 👏
ReplyDeleteHistory was made
ReplyDeleteHumanity needed this win
ReplyDeleteStarships were meant to fly
ReplyDelete🚀
Wow bro🚀🚀🚀
ReplyDeleteCongratulations 🔥 always epic.
ReplyDeleteincredible
ReplyDeleteStarship is so Incredible! 🚀🌌🔥🤩🦾
ReplyDeleteTO THE MOON
ReplyDeleteI can watch this beautiful video 24/7
ReplyDeleteSo beautiful, historical, legendary, just absolutely mind blowing 🤯 💨🚀🫶
ReplyDeleteLet’s goooooo!!!!!🚀♥️♥️♥️♥️♥️♥️♥️
ReplyDeleteWhat a super awesome launch, once again 🚀
ReplyDeletethe most exciting moment on earth🚀💖💖💖
ReplyDeleteAmazing 🤩
ReplyDeleteAwesome!
ReplyDelete🔥
ReplyDeleteCongratulations team SpaceX! 🚀
ReplyDeleteLet’s go 🚀🤍
ReplyDeleteWoohoo 🙌🏻
ReplyDeleteYay
SpaceX 😍
So powerful!
ReplyDeleteGo SpaceX, keep on doing, Ad Astra.
ReplyDeleteCongrats to the SpaceX Team! I'm working hard and learning as much as I can so I can one day join the dream of making life interplanetary and interstellar!
ReplyDelete💕💕💕💕💕
ReplyDeleteCongratulations 🎊 🚀🫶
ReplyDeleteIt's beautiful
ReplyDeleteResilience is with Elon Musk! 💪
ReplyDeletenever give up
DeleteAbsolutely amazing! I imagine Elon Musk is feeling both elated and proud.
ReplyDelete