Thread

SpaceX's Starship launching to orbit for first time ever today

304 points · 367 comments · geox

prodigycorp · 1790593015 · focus · HN ↗
Distillation: Stream starts in about 1hr. Payload is 26 starlink v3 satellites.
Launch window is 8:15 AM to 9:30 AM eastern time.
Superheavy will land 7min after launch. Starship lands 9hrs post launch.
Edit: Both will be splashdowns (originally said they'll be caught)
<a href="https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1qxvvenMPMQxB" rel="nofollow">https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1qxvvenMPMQxB
<a href="https://www.spacex.com/launches/starship-flight-14" rel="nofollow">https://www.spacex.com/launches/starship-flight-14
1. chedabob · 1790594489 · focus · HN ↗
  > Both expected to be caught by chopsticks. Will be a first for Starship.
  SpaceX's flight profile says both are splashdowns?
  1. prodigycorp · 1790594856 · focus · HN ↗
    Article must be wrong.
    > During operational flights, SpaceX plans to bring both Super Heavy and Ship back to the launch pad, where they'll be caught by the tower's "chopstick" arms. The company has already done this three times with Super Heavy but has not yet attempted it with Ship.
    timroman · 1790595036 · focus · HN ↗
    That is operational flights, today’s is still a test. Splashdowns today.
    [deleted] · 1790595168 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
2. billfor · 1790598465 · focus · HN ↗
  The live channel has some video of recovery of the last starship which is pretty cool - it remained floating so they crawled up and removed some of the tiles to see how they performed, and actually reinstalled a few of them for the upcoming flight. So this mission will actually see some of the tiles flying for a second time.
  1. jve · 1790599573 · focus · HN ↗
    Those were parts taken from this video: <a href="https://www.spacex.com/content/starship/holy-grail-of-rocketry" rel="nofollow">https://www.spacex.com/content/starship/holy-grail-of-rocket...
3. raverbashing · 1790599951 · focus · HN ↗
  > Payload is 26 starlink v3 satellites.
  F9 fits how many?
  1. Good4boothee · 1790600750 · focus · HN ↗
    29 v2 satellites (around 4 times lighter than v3)
    bluecalm · 1790605466 · focus · HN ↗
    Yeah and v3 has 10x downlink capacity and 20x uplink capacity of the v2.
  2. billfor · 1790602517 · focus · HN ↗
    I think somebody on the livestream said 60x capacity over Falcon.
  3. xoa · 1790605490 · focus · HN ↗
    >>Payload is 26 starlink v3 satellites.
    >F9 fits how many?
    Zero. Starlink v3 is too big for the F9 payload fairing. It's not just a matter of mass, the diameter and overall volume is important as well. In terms of performance, last I read they're supposed to add 1 Tbps of capacity each, so assuming they all work the first time all 26 would be around 10x the network addition of a full F9 v2 Mini launch. But the larger antennas would have other advantages beyond sheer bandwidth, and they'll be able to start getting more serious about direct to cell.
    bayarearefugee · 1790608566 · focus · HN ↗
    [dead]
    dzhiurgis · 1790641754 · focus · HN ↗
    > 1 Tbps of capacity each
    1000000 mbps / 50 mbps per Starlink customer * 80$ per month * 12 months * 26 satellites = $500M revenue per year added per launch.
    consensus1 · 1790645637 · focus · HN ↗
    Really even more since almost nobody actually uses 50 mbps bandwidth continuously
    dzhiurgis · 1790650274 · focus · HN ↗
    IDK how much they oversell it but also single sat probably is maxxed out for that location only, so all constellation is held back by single sat (tho there are usually few you can connect to).
    raverbashing · 1790678788 · focus · HN ↗
    Yes but I think the launch was more than that :)

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.