Starship goes up. Starship goes down. But is the program moving forward?

Re:Starship goes up. Starship goes down. But is the program ... by jonplackett on Thursday March 04, 2021 @08:54AM (#26342397)

> So the Starship program is clearly making progress. But is it getting to where it needs to be? Three explosions in three flights are hard to ignore.

This is the dumbest statement I've read so far about Starship.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starship goes up. Starship goes down. But is the program ... by bbatsell on Thursday March 04, 2021 @09:00AM (#26342487)

Berger is very smart, and he literally just published a (good) book about SpaceX. A layperson reading the article without background knowledge would have those questions. So he, as a journalist, posed them, and then answered them (fairly, which turns out to be almost entirely in SpaceX’s favor).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starship goes up. Starship goes down. But is the program ... by jonplackett on Thursday March 04, 2021 @09:05AM (#26342577)

Asking if three explosions is a problem, on three very early test launches, where so much went right, is a dumb question to even ask.

Or alternativatly, it's deliberate sensationalism and clickbait.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starship goes up. Starship goes down. But is the program ... by stupidcar on Thursday March 04, 2021 @10:05AM (#26343282)

You say it's a dumb question to ask, yet you still deemed necessary to include in your own statement facts such as that these are "very early test launches" and that "so much went right".

If it's so dumb for anyone to even ask if three explosions is a problem, why did you do this? Why didn't you just write "Asking if three explosions is a problem is a dumb question to even ask."? Why was it necessary to introduce supporting evidence?

Could it be that you think it's a dumb question because you know these facts? And the article author's job, as a journalist, is to assume, accurately, that most people don't know these facts. Most people are not SpaceX super-fans who have been closely following the test programme. Many will just hear "SpaceX blew up a third rocket" and wonder if things are going wrong, and the author's job, as a professional journalist is to inform those people.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starship goes up. Starship goes down. But is the program ... by ceejayoz on Thursday March 04, 2021 @09:36AM (#26342951)

Third option: It's doing the standard journalistic framing of "you, a curious person who's just now hearing of this, may be asking yourself x..."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starship goes up. Starship goes down. But is the program ... by unionpivo on Thursday March 04, 2021 @09:48AM (#26343082)

This is pro SpaceX article.

It's for people who do believe that 3 explosion's show trouble. Autor first "agrees" with that, and then explains why it doesn't matter, and SpacX is doing thing right.

It's long form of "Yeah good point , but how about ..."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starship goes up. Starship goes down. But is the program ... by ceejayoz on Thursday March 04, 2021 @09:28AM (#26342868)

It's setting up what the rest of the article will address.

"Hard to ignore" is not the same as "bad", as the rest of the article makes clear.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starship goes up. Starship goes down. But is the program ... by shazmosushi on Thursday March 04, 2021 @09:16AM (#26342726)

I think it's reasonable to bring up the upcoming Artemis Human Landing System down select in the context of where Starship development is at.

[ Parent | on HN ]