Space

7287 readers

1 users here now

News and findings about our cosmos.

Subcommunity of Science

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

Gaywallet@beehaw.org

wintrparkgrl@beehaw.org

remington@beehaw.org

Spacex team’s Starship partially melts during renterty of test flight 4, makes soft splash down anyway. (youtu.be)

submitted 5 months ago by sonori@beehaw.org to c/space@beehaw.org

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Evidently the joints on the flaps still need a little work into not letting gases through, but it seemed to still have enough actuation to keep the spacecraft stable until the engines took over for the landing burn.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BastingChemina@slrpnk.net 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It is estimated that currently each starship launch is cost around $90 million, and should be around $10 million once the program is more mature.

Source

For comparison each SLS launch is estimated to be around $4.1 billions. This cost not include development.

So a Starship launch is around 40 to 400 time cheaper than the SLS for similar capacity in LEO.

[–] Lem453@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 months ago

The Apollo compairaon above is even more ridiculous when you consider that starship made it to orbit and could've deployed a payload. The part that 'failed' was the soft landing and even that didn't fail. Only reuse failed.

Every Saturn v that was launched is currently sitting at the bottom of the ocean.

Taking shots at starship for failing even though Saturn v didn't even attempt the same mission parameters makes no sense.

Starship will have likely had 100+ missions before putting a human on it. Would you rather fly on something that's proven itself 100 times or something that is flying for the first time?