News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:SpaceX Starship 36 Anomaly by Aeolun on Thursday June 19, 2025 @04:35AM (#44316632)
I’m sure if the government gives SpaceX 200B a year to build a more reliable starship they can do it without blowing them up.
Re:SpaceX Starship 36 Anomaly by dotancohen on Thursday June 19, 2025 @04:57AM (#44316746)
Actually, this version 2 of Starship was explicitly designed for lower the dry mass of the vehicle. It seems like SpaceX is exploring the lower limit on acceptable mass, and thus strength, of the Starship. This is a development program, after all.
Re:SpaceX Starship 36 Anomaly by piva00 on Thursday June 19, 2025 @05:13AM (#44316824)
This comparison doesn't make sense, the USD 200B/year was to invent the capabilities, do trailblazing work on something that needed to be proven even feasible as a concept, to do fundamental/foundational work, not to productionalise technology.

I'd expect SpaceX to do much more now than NASA in the 60s if granted USD 200B/year, considering they are already standing on the shoulders of giants.

Re:SpaceX Starship 36 Anomaly by Aeolun on Thursday June 19, 2025 @06:26PM (#44323105)
Well sure, but they don’t have 200b a year. They’re doing more with (much) less.