The upper stage of the Starship is absolute dogshit that never works (and is kind of a misconceived design anyway for many of the same reasons and in many of the same ways as the Shuttle) but the first stage is reasonably functional and has successfully demonstrated landing and reuse.
Thanks for that channel, it looks very interesting.
Yeah, the two big differences between the F9 and starship first stages are the sheer number of engines that have to run right all at once and the catch tower.
The only previous rocket with that many engines was the N1 which famously struggled with getting them all to run together. SpaceX has a lot better computers available to them to handle that than the N1 designers did, and they have had first stage engine failures but they’ve managed to handle them without loss of vehicle.
The catch tower allows for significant weight savings (not just the weight of the legs themselves but also the internal structure to allow the rocket to be supported from the bottom with the tanks empty) and faster reuse than legs allow at the cost of needing to get your landing targeting extremely precise, which SpaceX has gotten a lot of practice with from the Falcon. The general availability of very fast computers helps here a lot too.
A lot of the Chinese companies developing reusable rockets are planning on catch towers too.
The upper stage of the Starship is absolute dogshit that never works (and is kind of a misconceived design anyway for many of the same reasons and in many of the same ways as the Shuttle) but the first stage is reasonably functional and has successfully demonstrated landing and reuse.
Thanks for that channel, it looks very interesting.
Ah makes sense, I guess the first stage is not that different in nature from Falcon which works pretty reliably now.
Yeah, the two big differences between the F9 and starship first stages are the sheer number of engines that have to run right all at once and the catch tower.
The only previous rocket with that many engines was the N1 which famously struggled with getting them all to run together. SpaceX has a lot better computers available to them to handle that than the N1 designers did, and they have had first stage engine failures but they’ve managed to handle them without loss of vehicle.
The catch tower allows for significant weight savings (not just the weight of the legs themselves but also the internal structure to allow the rocket to be supported from the bottom with the tanks empty) and faster reuse than legs allow at the cost of needing to get your landing targeting extremely precise, which SpaceX has gotten a lot of practice with from the Falcon. The general availability of very fast computers helps here a lot too.
A lot of the Chinese companies developing reusable rockets are planning on catch towers too.
Next few years will be interesting to watch.
Definitely. I believe China’s 2029 crewed moon landing date a lot more than anything Artemis related.
Same, China has been very consistent at hitting targets with the space program so far. I’m really excited to see an actual base on the moon built.
The ILRS is so cool, I’m really looking forward to the ISRU experiment on the 嫦娥八号 mission.