Die Untersuchung der Starship Flight 8 enthält den Weg für den Starship Flight 9 am 27. Mai.
Als SpaceX sich auf den neunten Testflug seines superschweren Starship-Startfahrzeugs vorbereitet hat, hat das Unternehmen Erkenntnisse aus seiner Untersuchung der Explosion der oberen Stufe der Rakete veröffentlicht, die als als bezeichnet wird "Schiff"während seines achten Testflugs im März.
https://www.space.com/space-exploration/private-spaceflight/spacex-knows-why-its-starship-flight-8-ship-exploded-traced-to-flash-in-rocket-engines
7 Kommentare
Interesting how it isn’t the exact same failure mode as the previous flight. It’s still likely related to the ship-raptor interface, but it’s not identical.
I’ll admit that I had assumed whatever fix they applied to address the harmonics issue didn’t work because they (seemed to) rush it, but it’s entirely possible that it was fixed or they didn’t get to full test it. In either case, I’m glad they’re taking their time now
How many times is this thing gonna blow up? Lmao
I would think a design that’s supposed to achieve human-rating would be tolerant of not having every single bolt perfectly tightened.
> Fixes for Starship’s upper stage came down to tightening some bolts at some of Ship’s more critical junctures and improving the plumbing so flammable gases don’t ignite when they aren’t supposed to:
SpaceX only exists to funnel resources to billionaires
The media fanfare over the past failures is absolute non-sense and overhyped. There is all kinds of speculation that turns out to be completely untrue. There is an endless supply of people who believe the hype. If they can get Falcon 9 working properly, they will get Starship working properly and reduce the failure rate. If any other company out there can do it better, I say let them make themselves known, and show SpaceX how it’s really done. Until then, they can either put up, or shut up.
And now that Elon has extracted himself from all regulation, investigation, and oversight, he has literally no incentive to fix any problems. In fact, the more rockets that blow up, the more government money will saturate his business.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|——-|———|—|
|CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules|
| |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)|
|[FAA](/r/Space/comments/1kv4zm5/stub/mu7jje2 „Last usage“)|Federal Aviation Administration|
|Jargon|Definition|
|——-|———|—|
|[Starliner](/r/Space/comments/1kv4zm5/stub/mu7nlyf „Last usage“)|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)|
|[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/1kv4zm5/stub/mu71c12 „Last usage“)|SpaceX’s world-wide satellite broadband constellation|
Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
—————-
^(3 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1klwg1g)^( has 39 acronyms.)
^([Thread #11366 for this sub, first seen 25th May 2025, 18:27])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)