March 14, 7:00 a.m. CT: Starship's third flight test

[GMoromisato]

I'm very excited about this test! A few observations that will hopefully get you excited:

1. Starship is, by far, the most powerful rocket ever launched. At T-0 its engines thrust with over 7,000 metric tons of force--twice the Saturn V. Imagine bolting together two Saturn Vs side-by-side and launching them--that's how much power will be in tomorrow's launch.

2. Starship is on the critical path for the next US crewed moon landing--the first in more than 50 years. Why did NASA choose to depend on Starship? Of all the proposals, Starship offered the most capability (100 tons delivered to the moon's surface) for the lowest cost (about $3 billion). A less powerful rocket would have been enough for NASA to land 2 astronauts on the moon, but NASA took the long-term view that funding Starship would enable far more ambitious plans for much less money.

3. For this IFT-3 test, Starship will attempt to move cryogenic (super-cold) propellant between two internal tanks while in orbit--something that has never been done before. This test will allow Space X to develop the ability to refuel Starship while in orbit. With orbital refueling, Starship will be able to travel almost anywhere in the solar system.

4. Starship has thermal-protection tiles, like the Space Shuttle. Ultimately they hope that it will be able to survive re-entry and return to its launch pad. If Space X succeeds in re-using Starship for a reasonable cost, it will dramatically reduce the cost of space travel.

Sadly, I'm on the US West Coast, which means I'll have to get up at 5 AM to tune into the launch!

[averageRoyalty]

> Sadly, I'm on the US West Coast, which means I'll have to get up at 5 AM to tune into the launch!

Roughly 12.5 hours from my comment, for anyone playing along. 11pm AEDT tonight, or a reasonable 8pm AWST.

[yakz]

Could proving out this technology make SpaceX the most valuable company on Earth, for a while? They invested early in “cheap” tech for rockets, which seems to be paying dividends in spades. One company owns most of the active satellites in orbit.

[iruoy]

Here is the time conversion:

https://time.is/0700_14_Mar_2024_in_CT?Starship%27s_Third_Fl...

[Karellen]

For everyone who knows their timezone offset, that's 2024-03-14 12:00:00 UTC.

[gary_0]

Is there any way to watch the official livestream without signing up for something?

[LorenDB]

You can watch the Twitter stream using the embedded card on the SpaceX website[0]. Just click the Watch button and it will open the player, no account required.

[0]: https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-...

[kyleee]

YouTube livestream I believe?

[tatersolid]

Was just watching YouTube stream on “SpaceX” channel and right at launch a QR code cryptocurrency scam replaced the SpaceX feed. Not sure who fucked up but I’m guessing the marketing folks at SpaceX lost control of their YouTube creds.

[pcardoso]

I think SpaceX is now only streaming on X.com, not YouTube. Perhaps you were watching a copycat channel.

[hendi_]

Yes.

[alpha123123]

> author:hulitu "/s" 754 results

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

[toomuchtodo]

gestures broadly at fleet of Falcon 9 vehicles flight proven and delivering payloads to orbit cheaper than any other launch provider, with capabilities unmatched by nation states

https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/07/spacex-launches-its-fl...

https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/02/spacexs-falcon-9-roc...

So many flavors to pick from and you had to pick salty. Unfortunate. Regardless of the methods, the outcomes are clear. Starship will succeed, if only because of the collective talent of the org persisting.

[Karellen]

How do you explain Falcon 9's low development cost, low flight/operations cost, and demonstrated reliability history, when compared with similarly capable launch platforms?

And given that Starship is being developed in a similar manner to F9 (iterate quickly, big explosions in prototypes is a great learning experience), what in particular makes you think the process will go wildly different to the way F9 did?

[Kon-Peki]

Hate to break it to you, but just about every single early employee (except Elon) had a decade+ of experience in aerospace.

[bryanlarsen]

Falcon 9 Block 5 has flown 253 times without a single failure.

[justinclift]

> failing their way to success

Sometimes that's a pretty valid way to operate. Seems to have worked out super well for SpaceX so far. ;)

[nine_k]

OK, let's talk line that.

F-35 was built by a bunch of kids who knew nothing about building fighter jets. They somehow limped towards international success by burning a ton of money, and by spending 17 years before they produced acceptable aircraft. What a bunch of clueless amateurs!

No matter how you look at it, certain things are hard.

[dividedbyzero]

If you want to be sceptical about SpaceX, why focus on the one thing they've proven they are good at? If Starship fails I have a hunch it will be for reasons not directly related to engineering, like unstable billionaire tantrums or demand not materializing in time, or simply politics.

[jlmorton]

Incinerating what money? They are no longer raising funds for SpaceX in funding rounds -- just doing funding rounds for employee liquidity events.

[carabiner]

Where are the real engineers? Boeing?