Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> They seem to have constructed a rocket with 10x the payload to LEO of the one they used to put those 10k satellites in orbit

They seem to have constructed a rocket that consistently gets heavier and more complex and more expensive and farthrt behind schedule and hasn't demonstrated specified payload.

IOW it ain't better than falcon heavy.



I checked the publicly released stats over Starship's development, and this is what I found: compared with the initial ~5,000 t / ~73.5 MN concept, the latest V3-class Starship/Super Heavy is trending toward roughly 35%+ more loaded propellant mass and about 40% more maximum liftoff thrust if you use the FAA’s ~103 MN figure. Payload capability has also moved upward from the early 100+ t reusable LEO baseline to SpaceX’s current public claim of up to 150 t fully reusable and 250 t expendable.

When I plug those numbers into https://www.aerovia.org/tools/rocket-equation I get Delta-Vs in the 28k km/hr range right where I'd expect for orbit.

You got a different rocket equation?


Pretty sure they mean that Starship is not working reliably yet


Starship has never met claimed specs and capabilities. It is so far behind schedule that it won't meet specs in time to remain relevant. Which is a generous way of saying it never will.


It's always a good laugh when I run into some old comment or video talking like this about Falcon. Thunderfoot is a hoot.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: